iii 



.>#■■ 



.\^ 



^\ ,"^<.« -/^ 



-^' 



.0 o. 



<) 




^^ c^^ ' «.'^, 










„H -t; 






A 



« -p 



- ^,. ^ ." t 



^^ •%<^- :.:fm^-^ ^.<^ 







^^ 



* J^^ '^ 



<. 



<, I. '*' A o, 







\0o. 




^ , X -^ .'^ " 






o^ 









'- V -■ M~S\///>^ '^t ■So 



^^0^^. 'Z^- 



' Y 



A MANUAL OF ANCIENT HISTORY 



RA WLINSON 



Eoitton 
MACMILLAN AND CO. 




PUBLISHERS TO THE UNIVERSITY OF 
OxfOYD 



A MANUAL 



^ 



OF 



ANCIENT HISTORY 

FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES 
TO THE FALL OF THE WESTERN EMPIRE 

Comprising the History of 

ChaldcEa, Assyria, Media, Babylonia, 

Lydia, Phoenicia,^ Syria, JudcEa, Egypt, Carthage, Persia, 

Greece, Macedonia, Rome, and Parthia. 




^ GEORGE RAWLINSON, M. A. 

CAMDEN PROFESSOR OF ANCIENT HISTORY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD 




AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 
M.DCCC.LXIX 

\^All rights reserved^ 



PREFACE. 

The work here given to the public has been contem- 
plated by the Author for several years. The ' Handbuch' 
of Professor Heeren, originally published in 1799, and 
corrected by its writer up to the year 1828, is, so far as he 
knows, the only modern work of reputation treating in a 
compendious form the subject of Ancient History gene- 
rally. Partial works, i. e. works embracing portions of the 
field, have been put forth more recently, as, particularly, 
the important * Manuel ' of M. Lenormant {Manuel d'kis- 
toire ancienne de V Orient jusqiHaitx guerres Mediqties. 
Paris, 1868-9; 3 vols. i2mo). But no work with the 
scope and on the scale of Professor Heeren's has, so far 
as the present writer is aware, made its appearance since 
1828. That work itself, in its English dress, is, he believes, 
out of print ; and it is one, so great a portion of which 
has become antiquated by the progress of historical criti- 
cism and discovery, that it cannot now be recommended 
to the student, unless with large reserves and numerous 
cautions. Under these circumstances, it seemed to the 
present writer desirable to replace the ' Handbuch' of 
Heeren by a Manual conceived on the same scale, ex- 
tending over the same period, and treating (in the main) 
of the same nations. 



vi PREFACE. 

Heeren's Hand-book always appeared to him admir- 
able in design, and, considering the period at which it 
was written, excellent in execution. He has been content 
to adopt, generally, its scheme and divisions ; merely 
seeking in every case to bring the history up to the level 
of our present advanced knowledge, and to embody in 
his work all the really ascertained results of modern 
research and discovery. He has not suffered himself to 
be tempted by the example of M. Lenormant to include 
in the Manual an account of the Arabians or the Indians ; 
since he has not been able to convince himself that either 
the native traditions of the former, as reported by Abul- 
feda, Ibn-Khaldoun, and others, or the Epic poems of 
the latter (the Maha-Bharata SindRamayana) , are trust- 
worthy sources of history. With more hesitation he has 
decided on not including in his present work the history 
of the Sassanidse, which is sufficiently authentic, and 
which in part runs parallel with a period that the Manual 
embraces. But, on the whole, it appeared to him that 
the Sassanidse belonged as much to Modern as to Ancient 
History — to the Byzantine as to the Roman period. And 
in a doubtful case, the demands of brevity, which he felt 
to be imperative in such a work as a ' Manual/ seemed 
entitled to turn the scale. 

Oxford, Nov. 23, 1869, 



CONTENTS. 



INTRODUCTION. 

History. — History Proper, its divisions. — Ancient History, how best distingixished 
from Modem. — Sources of History: i. Antiquities; 2. Written Records, 
including (a) Inscriptions, (&) Books. — Importance of Inscriptions. — Coins. — 
Books, ancient and modern. — Cognate sciences to History: i. Chronology; 
2. Geography. — Chief eras. — Chronological Monuments. — Works on Chro- 
nology.— Works on Geography. — Modes of dividing Ancient History. — 
Scheme of the Work ....... 



BOOK I. 

History of the Ancient Asiatic and African States and Kingdoms from the 
Earliest Times to the Foundation of the Persian Monarchy by Cyrus 
the Great . . . . . . . . .11 



PART I. Asiatic Nations. 

Preliminary Remarks on the Geography of Asia . . . . . 

Prehminary Observations on the General Character of the Early Asiatic Kingdoms 
History of the Ancient Asiatic Kingdoms previous to Cyrus 

I. Chaldsean Monarchy ...... 

II. Assyrian Monarchy ...... 

III. Median Monarchy ...... 

IV. Babylonian Monarchy ..... 
V. Kingdoms in Asia Minor : i. Phrygia; 2. Cilicia; 3. Lydia . 

VI. Phoenicia ....... 

ASil. Syria ........ 

VIII. Judsea 

a. From the Exodus to the Establishment of the Monarchy 

b. From the Establishment of the Monarchy to the Separation into 

Two Kingdoms ..... 

e. From the Separation of the Kingdoms to the Captivity under 
Nebuchadnezzar .... 



25 
25 
27 
31 
33 
36 
38 
43 
44 
45 

46 
49 



VIU 



CONTENTS. 



PART II. African Nations. 

Preliminary Remarks on the Geography of Ancient Africa 

Historical Sketch of the Ancient African States ..... 

I. Egypt 

II, Carthage ........ 

a. From the Foundation of the City to the Commencement of the 

Wars with Syracuse ...... 

b. From the Commencement of the Wars with Syracuse to the 

Breaking-out of the first War with Rome 



53 

58 
58 

75\ 



BOOK 11. 

History of Persia from the Accession of Cyrus to the Destruction of the Empire 
by Alexander the Great ....... 



BOOK III. 



History of the Grecian States from the Earliest Times to the Accession of 

Alexander the Great . . , . . . . . 106 

Geographical Outline of Greece ....... 106 

First Period. 
The Ancient Traditional History, from the Earliest Times to the Dorian 

Occupation of the Peloponnese . . . . . • ii7 

Second Period. 

History of Greece from the Dorian Conquest of the Peloponnese to the Com- 
mencement of the Wars with Persia .... 

Part I. History of the principal Hellenic States in Greece Proper 
I. Sparta 
II. Athens 

Part II. History of the other Grecian States 
I. In the Peloponnese : — 

a. Achsea 

b. Arcadia 

c. Corinth 

d. Elis . 

e. Sicyon 
II. In Central Greece : — 

a. Megaris 

b. Boeotia 

c. Phocis 

d. Locris 

e. ^tolia 
/. Acarnania 



CONTENTS. 


ix 




PAGE 


III. In Northern Greece : — 




a. Thessaly ,...•• 


. 141 


b. Epirus ...... 


. 14a 


IV. In the Islands :— 




a. Corcyia ...... 


. 142 


b. Cephallenia 




• 143 


c. Zacynthus 




• 143 


d. Mgins, 




• 143 


e. Euboea 




• 143 


/. The Cyclades 




• 143 


g. Lemnos 




• 144 


b. Thasos 




• 144 


i. Crete 




• 144 


7. Cyprus 




. 145 


V. Greek Colonies . 




. 146 


i. Colonies of the Eastern Group : — 




a. The ^olian Colonies 


. 148 


b. The Ionian Colonies . 


• 149 


c. The Dorian Colonies . 


. 150 


d. Colonies on the North Coast of the yEgean 


• 151 


e. Colonies of the Propontis 


. 152 


/. Colonies of the Euxine 


. 152 


ii. Colonies of the Western Group : — 




a. Colonies of the Illyrian Coast 


• 153 


b. Colonies in Italy 


. 154 


c. Colonies in Sicily 




. 158 


Syracuse . 




. 158 


Megara Hyblaea 




. 160 


Gela 




. 160 


Camarina 




. 161 


Agrigentum 




. 161 


Selinus 




. 162 


Naxos 




. 162 


Leontini . 




. 162 


Catana 




. 163 


Zancl6 or Messana 


. 163 


Himera .... 


. 164 


d. Colonies on the Coasts of Gaul and Spain 


. 164 


e. Colonies on the Coast 


of Africa 


. 165 



Third Period. 



History of Greece from the Commencement of the Wars with Persia to the 

Battle of Chgeroneia . . . . . . . .167 



CONTENTS. 



BOOK IV. 

PAGB 

History of the Macedonian Monarchy . . . . 7 '194 

Geographical Outline of Macedonia . . . . . -194 

Historical Sketch of the Monarchy : — 

First Period. 
From the Commencement of the Monarchy to the Death of Alexander the Great 195 

Seco?id Period. 
From the Death of Alexander the Great to the Battle of Ipsus . . .209 

Third Period. 

History of the States into which the Macedonian Monarchy was broken up after 
the Battle of Ipsus ..... 

Part I. Histoiy of the Syrian Kingdom of the Seleucidse 

Part II. History of the Egyptian Kingdom of the Ptolemies 

Part III. History of Macedonia, and of Greece, from the Death of Alexander to 
the Roman Conquest 

Part IV. Histoiy of the Smaller States and Kingdoms formed out of the Frag- 
ments of Alexander's Monarchy 
I. Kingdom of Pergamus 
II. Kingdom of Bithynia . 

III. Kingdom of Paphlagonia 

IV. Kingdom of Pontus 
V. Kingdom of Cappadocia 

VI. Kingdom of the Greater Ai'menia 
VII. Kingdom of Annenia Minor . 
VIII. Kingdom of Bactria 
IX. Kingdom of Parthia . 
X. Kingdom of Judaea 

a. From the Captivity to the Fall of the Persian Empire 

b. From the Fall of the Persian Empire to the Re-establishment 

of an Independent Kingdom 

c. From the Re-establishment of an Independent Kingdom to the 

Full Establishment of the Power of Rome 

d. From the Full Establishment of Roman Power to the Destruc 

tion of Jerusalem by Titus .... 



BOOK V. 

PART I. History of Rome. 

Preliminary Remarks on the Geography of Ancient Italy . . -320 

Sketch of the History of Rome : — 

First Period. 

The Ancient Traditional History from the Earliest Times to the Commencement 

of the Republic ........ 334 



CONTENTS. xi 

Second Period. 

PAGE 

From the Foundation of the Republic to the Commencement of the Samnite 

Wars . . . . . . . . . .351 

Third Period. 

From the Breaking-out of the First Samnite War to the Commencement of the 

Wars with Carthage . . . . . . . -37^ 

Fourth Period. 

From the Commencement of the First War with Carthage to the Rise of the 

Civil Broils under the Gracchi ...... 384 

Fifth Period. 

From the Commencement of Internal Troubles under the Gracchi to the Estab- 
lishment of the Empire under Augustus . . . . .412 

Sixth Period. 

From the Establishment of the Empire under Augustus to the Destruction of the 

Roman Power in the West by Odoacer . . . . -453 

Preliminary Remarks on the Geographical Extent and Principal Divisions of the 

Roman Empire ........ 453 

Historical Sketch of the Roman Empire : — 

First Section. From the Battle of Actium to the Death of Commodus . 466 

Second Section. From the Death of Commodus to the Accession of Diocletian 500 
Third Section. From the Accession of Diocletian to the Final Division of the 

Empire . . . . . . . . -Si? 

Fourth Section. From the Final Division of the Empire to the Deposition of 

Romulus Augustus ........ 540 



PART II. History of Parthia. 
Geogi'aphical Outline of the Parthian Empire ....'. 549 
Sketch of the History of Parthia ; — 

First Period. 

From the Foundation of the Kingdom by Arsaces to the Establishment of the 

Empire by Mithridates I . , . . . . -553 

Second Period. 

From the Establishment of the Empire by Mithridates I to the Commencement 

of the Wars with Rome .""...... 557 

Third Period. 

From the Commencement of the Wars with Rome to the Destruction of the 

Empire by Artaxerxes . . . , . . .562 



CONTENTS. 



APPENDIX. 



Genealogical Tables . 



I. Macedonian Royal Houses : — 

A. House of Alexander the Great 

B. House of Antipater 

C. House of Antigonus 
II. Royal House of the Seleucidae 

III. Royal House of the Ptolemies 

IV. Royal House of Pergamus 
V. Royal House of Bithynia 

VI. Royal House of Pontus 
VII. Royal House of Cappadocia . 
VIII. Jewish Royal Houses : — 

A. Royal House of the Maccabees 

B. Royal House of the Herods 
IX. Roman Imperial Houses : — 

A. The Julian House 

B. The Claudian House . . ' 

C. The House of Constantine the Great 

D. The House of Theodosius the Great 
X. Parthian Royal Houses : — 

A. The House of Arsaces I 

B. The House of Sanatrceces 

C. The House of Artabanus II 

D. The House of Vonones II 



Errata. 



Page 225, U. I, 2, omit the rest of the sentence after Demetrius. 
Page 307, 1. 28, for Demetrius read Eucr&tides. 



MANUAL OF ANCIENT HISTORY. 



INTRODUCTION. 

I . The word * History,' which etymologically means ' inquiry ' 
or 'research/ and which has many slightly differing uses, is 
attached in modern parlance pre-eminently and especially to 
accounts of the rise, progress, and affairs of Nations. The con- 
sideration of man, prior to the formation of political communities 
and apart from them, belongs to Natural History — and especially 
to that branch of it which is called Anthropology — but not to 
History Proper. History Proper is the history of States or Nations, 
both in respect of their internal affairs, and in regard to their 
dealings one with another. Under the former head, one of the 
most important branches is Constitutional History, or the history 
of Governments j under the latter are included not only accounts 
of the wars, but likewise of the friendly relations of the different 
States, and of their commercial or other intercourse. 

Anthropology, though not History Proper, is akin to it, and is a science of 
which the historical student should not be ignorant. It treats of man prior 
to the time when ' History ' takes him up, and thus forms, in some sort, the 
basis on which History rests. The original condition of man, his primary 
habitat or place of abode, the mode and time of his dispersion ; the questions 
of the formation of races, of their differences, and of their affinities : these, 
and similar subjects, which belong properly to Anthropology, are of interest 
to the historian, and underlie his proper field. The most important works 
bearing on these matters are : — 

Ike Book of Genesis — the only extant work which claims to give an authori- 
tative account of the creation and dispersion of mankind, and which is uni- 
versally admitted to contain most interesting notices of the primitive condition 
of the human race, and of important facts belonging to very remote times. 
Kalisch's Historical and Critical Commentary, London, Longman, 1855, con- 
tains a mass of valuable, though not always quite sober, illustration from the 
best modern sources. 

The Physical History of Mankind, by Dr. Prichard, London, 3rd edition, 
1836 — a work of great grasp and power, elaborately illustrated, and in many 



2 ANCIENT HISTORY. 

respects of enduring value; but in some points behind the existing state of 
our knowledge. Not, however, at present superseded by any general work. 

Prehistoric Man, by Sir John Lubbock. London, 1866. This book is based 
mainly on recent researches into the earliest vestiges of man upon the earth, 
as those believed to have been found underneath the floors of caves, in ancient 
gravel deposits, in the soil at the bottom of lakes, in the so-called ' kitchen- 
middings,' and the like. It is well illustrated. 

1. History Proper is usually divided either into two, or into 
three, portions. If the triple division is adopted, the portions are 
called respectively, ' Ancient History," the ' History of the Middle 
Ages," and 'Modern History.' If the twofold division is pre- 
ferred, the middle portion Is suppressed^ and History is regarded as 
falling under the two heads of ' Ancient ' and ' Modern.' 

3. ' Ancient ' History is improperly separated from ' Modern ' 
by the arbitrary assumption of a particular date. A truer, better, 
and more convenient division may be made by regarding as 
ancient all that belongs to a state of things which has completely 
passed away, and as modern all that connects itself inseparably 
with the present. In Western Europe the irruption of the 
Northern Barbarians, in Eastern Europe, in Asia, and in Africa 
the Mohammedan conquests, form the line of demarcation between 
the two portions of the historic field ; since these events brought 
to a close the old condition of things, and introduced the condi- 
tion which continues to the present day. 

4. The Sources of History fall under the two heads of ^written 
records^ and antlqultleSj or the actual extant remains of ancient 
times, whether buildings, excavations, sculptures, pictures, vases, 
or other productions of art. These antiquities exist either in the 
countries anciently inhabited by the several nations, where they 
may be seen In situ i or in museums, to which they have been 
removed by the moderns, partly for their better preservation, 
partly for purposes of general study and comparison ; or, finally, 
in private collections, where they are for the most part in- 
accessible, and subserve the vanity of the collectors. 

No general attempt has ever been made to collect into one work a de- 
scription or representation of all these various remains; and, indeed, their 
multiplicity is so great that such a collection is barely conceivable. Works, 
however, on limited portions of the great field of ' Antiquities ' are numerous ; 
and frequent mention will have to be made of them in speaking of the sources 
for the history of different states and periods. Here those only will be 
noticed which have something of a general character. 

Oberlin, Orbis antiqiii monumentis suis illustrati primce linecs. Argentorati, 
1790, Extremely defective, but remarkable, considering the time at which it 
was written. 



INTRODUCTION. 3 

CaylUS, Recueil cf Antiqiiites Egyptiennes, Etrusques, Grecques, et Romaines. 
Paris, 1752-67. Full of interest, but with engravings of a very rude and 
primitive character. 

MoNTFAUCON, V Antiquite expliquee et representee en figures. Paris, 1719-24 ; 
15 vols, folio. 

Smith, Dr. W., Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities. London, 2nd 
edition, 1853. 

Fergusson, James, History of Architecture in all Countries, from the Earliest 
Times to the Present Day. London, 1865-7. 

Birch, Samuel, Ancient Pottery. London, 1858. 

5. The second source of Ancient History, 'written records.^ is at 
once more copious and more important than the other. It con- 
sists of two main classes of documents — ist, Inscriptions on public 
monuments, generally contemporary with the events recorded in 
them j and andly. Books, the works of ancient or modern writers 
on the subject. 

6. Whether Inscriptions were, or were not, the most ancient 
kind of written memorial is a point that can never be determined. 
What is certain is, that the nations of antiquity made use to 
a very large extent of this mode of commemorating events. In 
Egypt, in Assyria, in Babylonia, in Armenia, in Persia, in Phoe- 
nicia, in Lycia, in Greece, in Italy, historical events of import- 
ance were from time to time recorded in this way — sometimes on 
the natural rock_, which was commonly smoothed for the purpose j 
sometimes on obelisks or pillars; frequently upon the walls of 
temples, palaces, and tombs ; occasionally upon metal plates, or 
upon tablets and cylinders of fine clay — hard and durable materials 
all of them, capable of lasting hundreds or even thousands of 
years, and in many cases continuing to the present day. The 
practice prevailed, as it seems, most widely in Assyria and in 
Egypt ; it was also in considerable favour in Persia and among the 
Greeks and Romans. The other nations used it more sparingly. 
It was said about half a century ago that 'of the great mass 
of inscriptions still extant, but few comparatively are of any 
importance as regards history.' But this statement, if true when 
it was made, which may be doubted, at any rate requires modi- 
fication now. The histories of Egypt and Assyria have been in 
a great measure reconstructed from the inscriptions of the two 
countries. The great inscription of Behistun has thrown much 
light upon the early history of Persia. That on the Delphic tripod 
has illustrated the most glorious period of Greece. It is now 
generally felt that inscriptions are among the most important 

B 1 



4 ANCIENT HISTORY. 

of ancient records, and that their intrinsic value makes up to 
a great extent for their comparative scantiness. 

General collections of ancient inscriptions do not as yet exist. But the 
following, which have more or less of a general character, may be here 
mentioned : — 

MURATORI, LUD. Ant., No'vus Ihesaurus Veterum Inscriptionum. Mediolani, 
1739, &c. Together with Donati, Supplementa. Luccse, 1764. 

Gruter, Inscriptiones aniiquoe totius orbis Romani, cura J. G. Gr^VII. 
Amstel. 1707 ; 4 vols, folio. 

POCOCKE, R., Inscriptionum antiquarum Gr<Bcarum et Latinarum liber. Londini, 
1752 ; folio. 

Chandler, R., Inscriptiones antiques pleraque nondum edita. Oxonii, I774 j 
folio. 

OsANN, Fr., Sylloge Inscriptionum antiquarum Grcecarum et Latinarum. 
Lipsiae, 1834; folio. 

A large number of cuneiform inscriptions, Assyrian, Babylonian, and Per- 
sian, will be found in the Expedition Scientifique en Mesopotamie of M. JULES 
Oppert. Paris, 1858. The Persian, Babylonian, and Scythian or Turanian 
transcripts of the great Behistun Inscription are contained in the Journal of 
the Asiatic Society, vols, x., xiv., and xv., to which they were contributed by Sir 
H. Rawlinson and Mr. Norris. A small but valuable collection of inscrip- 
tions, chiefly cuneiform, is appended to Mr. Rich's Narrative of a Journey 
from. Bussora to Persepolis. London, 1839. . 

7. Under the head of Inscribed Monuments must be included 
Coins, which have in most instances a legend, or legends, and 
which often throw considerable light upon obscure points of 
history. The importance of coins is no doubt the greatest in 
those portions of ancient history where the information derivable 
from authors — especially from contemporary authors — is the 
scantiest j their use however is not limited to such portions, 
but extends over as much of the historical field as admits of 
numismatic illustration. 

Collections of ancient coins exist in most museums and in many libraries. 
The collection of the British Museum is among the best in the world. The 
Bodleian Library has a good collection ; and there is one in the library of 
Christ Church, Oxford, possessing many points of interest. In default of access 
to a good collection, or in further prosecution of numismatic study, the learner 
may consult the following comprehensive works : — 

Spanheim, Dissertatio de usu et prcestantia Numismatum. London and 
Amsterdam, 1706-17; 2 vols, folio. 

Eckhel, De Doctrina Nummorum Veterum. Vindebonee, 1792-8 ; 8 vols. 4to. 

MiONNET, Description des Medailles. Paris, 1806-37 ; 16 vols. 8vo., copiously 
illustrated. 

Humphreys, Ancient Coins and Medals. London, 1850. In this work, by 
means of embossed plates, facsimiles of the obverse and reverse of many coins 
are produced. 

Leake, Numismata Hellenica. London, 1854. 

Works upon coins, embracing comparatively narrow fields, are numerojas, 
and often specially valuable. Many such works will be noticed among the 
sources for the history of particular times and nations. 

8. The ' Books ' from which ancient history may be learnt are 



INTRODUCTION. 5 

of two kinds — (i) Ancient j and (2) Modern. Ancient works which 
treat the subject in a general way are neither numerous, nor 
(with one exception) very valuable. The chief of those now 
extant are : — 

DiODORUS SICULUS, Bibliotheca Historica, in forty books, of which only 
books i. — V, inch and xi.— xx. incl. have come down to us entire. The best 
editions are those of Wesseling (Bipont. 1793-1800; 10 vols. 8vo.) and 
DiNDORF (Parisiis, 1843-4; 2 vols. 8vo.). This work was a universal 
history from the earliest times down to B.C. 60. 

PoLYBius, Htstori(P, likewise in forty books, of which the first five only 
are complete. Originally, a universal history of the period commencing 
B.C. 220 and terminating B.C. 146. Bad in style, but excellent in criticism 
and accuracy. The best edition is Schweigh^user's (Lips. 1789 et seqq. ; 
8 vols. 8vo. Reprinted at Oxford, 1823, together with the same scholar's 
Lexicon Polybianum, in 5 vols. 8vo.). A good edition of the mere text has 
been published by Didot, Paris, 1859. 

JUSTINUS, Historic^ Philippic (P, in forty-four books, extracted, or rather 
abbreviated, from Trogus Pompeius, a writer of the Augustan age. This is a 
universal history from the earliest times to Augustus Caesar. It is a short 
work, and consequently very slight and sketchy. Of recent editions, the best 
is that of DuEBNER, Lips. 1831. The best of the old editions is that of Stras- 
burg, 1802, 8vo. 

ZoNARAS, Chronicon sive Annates, in twelve books. A universal history, ex- 
tending from the Creation to the death of the Emperor Maximin, a.d. 238. 
Greatly wanting in criticism. The best edition is that in the Corpus Scriptorum 
Historice Byzantince. Bonnee, 1841-4. 

Besides these, there remain fragments from the universal history of Nico- 
LAUS Damascenus (Fragm. Hist. Grcec. vol. iii. ed. C. MtJLLER, Parisiis, 1849), 
which are of very considerable value. 

Modern works embracing the whole range of ancient history are 
numerous and important. They may be divided into two classes : 
{a) Works on Universal History, of which Ancient History forms 
only a part- {h) Works exclusively devoted to Ancient History.- 

(«) To the first class belong : — 

The Universal History, Ancient ayid Modern, wjith maps and additions. London, 
1736-44 ; 7 vols, folio. Reprinted in Svo. in 64 vols. London, 1747-66 ; again, 
in 60 vols., with omissions and additions. 

Ralegh, Sir W., History of the World, in his Works. Oxford, Clarendon 
Press, 1829; 8 vols. Svo. 

BossuET, Discours sur I'Histoire Uni-verselle. Paris, 168 1 ; 4to. (Translated 
into English by Rich. Spencer. London, 1730; 8vo.) 

MiLLOT, EUmens de VHistoire Generale. Paris, 1772 et seqq. Reprinted at 
Edinburgh, 1823 ; 6 vols. 8vo. (Translated into English, 1778 ; 2 vols. 8vo.) 

Eichhorn, Weltgeschichte. Leipsic, 1799-1820; 5 vols. Svo. 

Keightley, Th., Outlines of History, Svo., being vol. ix. of Lardner's 
Cabinet Cyclopaedia. London, 1S35 et seqq. A convenient abridgment. 

TytleR and NarES, Elements of General History. London, 1825. 'Owes 
its reputation and success to the want of a better work on the subject.' 

(-^) Under the second head may be mentioned: — 
Niebuhr, B. G., Fortrdge ijber alte Geschichte. Berlin, 1847; 3 vols. Svo. 
Edited after his death by his son, Marcus Niebuhr. (Translated into 
English by Dr. Leonhard Schmitz, with additions and corrections. London, 



6 ANCIENT HISTORY. 

1852 ; 3 vols. 8vo.) A work of the highest value, embodying all the results of 
modern discovery up to about the year 1830. 

SCHLOSSER, Uni'versal - historische Uebersicht der Geschichte der alien Welt. 
Frankfort, 1826; 3 vols. 8vo. 

Bredov?, Handbuch der alte Geschichte. Altona, 1799; 8vo. (Translated 
into English. London, 1827; 8vo.) 

Smith, Philip, An Ancient History from the Earliest Records to the Fall of the 
Western Empire. London, 1865 ; 3 vols. 8vo. Embodies the latest results of 
modern discovery. 

HeerEN, Ideen uber die Politik, den Ferkehr, und den Handel der njornehmsten 
Volker der alten Welt ; 4th edition. Gottingen, 1824. (Translated into English. 
Oxford, 1833 et seqq.; 5 vols. 8vo.) A vi^ork which, so far as the commerce 
of the ancients is concerned, has not been superseded. 

A few modern works of a less comprehensive character than 
those hitherto described, but still belonging rather to general than 
to particular history, seem also to deserve mention here. Such 
are — 

ROLLIN, Histoire Ancienne des Egyptiens, des Carthaginiens, des Assyriens, des 
Mhdes et des Perses, des Macedoniens, et des Grecs. Paris, 1824; 12 vols. 8vo., 
revue par Letronne. ' The last and best edition.' (Translated into EngUsh. 
London, 1768 ; 7 vols. 8vo.) The earher portion of this work is now anti- 
quated, and must be replaced by writers who have had the advantage of recent 
discoveries. 

Rawlinson, G., 7he Five Great Monarchies of the Ancient Eastern World, or 
the History, Geography, and Antiquities of Chaldma, Assyria, Babylonia, Media, 
and Persia. London, 1862-7 ; 4 vols. 8vo. With numerous illustrations. 

9. The fact that all historical events must occur at a certain 
time and in a certain place attaches to History two branches of 
knowledge as indispensable auxiliaries ; viz. Chronology and Geo- 
graphy. By the universal historian these sciences should be known 
completely : and a fair knowledge of them ought to be acquired by 
every historical student. A fixed mode of computing time, and an 
exact or approximate reckoning of the period occupied by the 
events narrated, is essential to every methodised history ; nor can 
any history be regarded as complete without a more or less elabo- 
rate description of the countries which were the theatres of the 
events recorded in it. 

10. Exact Chronology is difficult, and a synchronistic view of 
history generally is impossible, without the adoption of an era. 
Nations accordingly, as the desire of exactness or the wish to 
synchronise arose, invented eras for themselves_, which generally 
remained in use for many hundreds of years. The earliest-known 
instance of the formal assumption of a fixed point in time from 
which to date events belongs to the history of Babylon, where the 
era of Nabonassar, b.c. 747, appears to have been practically in use 
from that year. The era of the foundation of Rome, b.c. 75a 



INTRODUCTION. 7 

(according to the best authorities), was certainly not adopted by 
the Romans till after the expulsion of the kings ; nor did that of 
the Olympiads, b.c. 776, become current in Greece until the time 
of Timaeus (about B.C. 300). The Asiatic Greeks, soon after the 
death of Alexander, adopted the era of the Seleucidae, e.g. 312. 
The era of Antioch, b.c. 49, was also commonly used in the East 
from that date till a.d. 600. The Armenian era^ a.d. ^^'itt ^"^^ the 
Mahometan, a.d. 611 (the Hegira), are likewise worthy of notice. 
The most important chronological monuments are the follow- 
ing :— 

The Assyrian Canon (discovered by Sir Henry Rawlinson, among the 
antiquities in the British Museum, and published by him in the Atheimum, 
Nos. 1812 and 2064), an account of Assyrian Chronology from about B.C. 909 
to B.C. 680, impressed on a number of clay tablets in the reign of Sardanapalus, 
the son of Esarhaddon, all now more or less broken, but supplying each other's 
deficiencies, and yielding by careful comparison a complete chronological 
scheme, covering a space of 230 years. The chronology of the whole period 
is verified by a recorded solar eclipse, which is evidently that of June 15, 
B.C. 763. 

The Apis Stelae (discovered by M. Mariette, close to the Pyramid of 
Abooseer, near Cairo), published in the Zeitschrift fur die Kunde des Morgen- 
landes for 1864, and also by M. DE RouGE in his Recherches sur les monuments 
qu^on peut attribuer aux six premieres Dynasties de Manethon. Paris, 1866. Most 
important for Egyptian Chronology. 

The Parian Marble (brought to England from Smyrna in the year 1627 by 
an agent of the Earl of Arundel, and presented to the University of Oxford by 
his son; preserved among the 'Arundel Marbles' in the Schola Philosophice 
Mora/is, but in a very decayed condition), a chronological arrangement of 
important events in Greek history from the accession of Cecrops to the 
archonship of Callistratus, B.C. 355. Best editions: Marmora Arundeliana, 
ed. J. Selden. Londini, 1628. Marmora Oxoniensia, ed. R. Chandler. 
Oxoniis, 1763 ; folio. Marmor Parium,, ed. C. MtJLLER, in vol. i. of the Frag- 
menta Historicorum Grcecorum. Parisiis, 1846. The inscription is also given in 
Boeckh's Corpus Inscriptionum GrcBcarum, vol. ii. No. 2374. 

The Fasti Capitolini (discovered at Rome on the site of the ancient 
Forum, partly in the year 1547, partly in 1817 and 1818, and still preserved in the 
Museum of the Capitol), a list of the Roman magistrates and triumphs from 
the commencement of the Republic to the end of the reign of Augustus. 
Best edition of the fragments discovered in 1547, the second of Sigonius, 
Venet. 1556, Best edition of the fragments of 1817-8, that of Borghesi, 
Milan, 18 18. These Fasti are reproduced in appendices to the first and 
second volumes of Dr. Arnold's History of Rome, down to the close of the 
first Punic War. An excellent reprint and arrangement of the fragments will 
be found in Mommsen's Inscriptiones Latince Antiquissimce. Berlin, 1863. 

Ancient works on Chronology were numerous; but not many 
have come down to our times. The subject first began to be treated 
as a science by the Alexandrians in the third century before 
Christ. Eratosthenes, Apollodorus, Sosicrates, and others, under- 
took the task of arranging the events of past history according 
to exact chronological schemes, which were no doubt sufficiently 



8 ANCIENT HISTORY. 

arbitrary. These writers were succeeded by Castor (about B.C. 
100-50), Cephalion, Julius Africanus (a.d. 200), and Hippolytus, 
of whom the last two were Christians. The earliest work of a 
purely chronological character which has come down to us is the 
following : — 

EUSEBIUS Pamphili, Chronicorum Canonum libri duo. The Greek text is 
lost ; but the latter book has been preserved to us in the Latin translation of 
Jerome ; and the greater part of both books exists in an Armenian version, 
which has been rendered into Latin by the Armenian monk Zohrab, assisted 
by Cardinal Mai. (Mediolani, 1818 ; folio.) 

Other chronological works of importance are — 

Georgius Syncellus, Chronographia, in the Corpus Hist. Byzant., ed. DlN- 
DORF. Bonnee, 1829; 2 vols. 8vo. 

Johannes Malalas, Chronographia, in the same collection, ed, Dindorf. 
Bonnae, 183 1 ; 8vo. 

Chronicon Paschale, in the same collection. Bonnse, 1832; 2 vols. 8vo. 

Scaliger, Jos., De Emendatione Temporum. Genevse, 1629. 

Ideler, Handbuch der Chronologie. Berlin, 1825-6 ; 2 vols. 8vo. 

V Art de Verifier les Dates. Paris, 1819-44; 3^ vols. 8vo. 

Hales, W., Ne<w Analysis of Chronology, explaining the History and Antiquities 
of the Primiti've Nations of the World. London, 1809-12; 3 vols. .4to. New 
edition, corrected and improved, 1830 ; 4 vols. 8vo. 

Clinton, H. F., Fasti Helknici, or 7he Civil and Literary Chronology of Greece 
from the Fifty-fifth Olympiad to the Death of Augustus. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 
1827-30; 3 vols. 4to. A valuable work, not confined to the chronology of 
Greece, but embracing that of all the Asiatic kingdoms and empires from the 
earliest times to Alexander's conquest of Persia. 

II. Geography, the other ancillary science to History, was re- 
cognised from a very early date as closely connected with it. The 
History of Herodotus is almost as much geographical as historical : 
and the geographical element occupies a considerable space in the 
histories of many other ancient writers, as notably Polybius and 
Diodorus. At the same time the separability of geography, and 
its claims to be regarded as a distinct branch of knowledge, were 
perceived almost from the first j and works upon it, whereof only 
fragments remain, were written by Hecatseus of Miletus, Scylax 
of Caryanda, Charon of Lampsacus, Damastes, Eratosthenes, Aga- 
tharchides, Scymnus of Chios, and others. The most important 
of the extant classical works on the subject are — 

The Periplus Maris Mediterranei, ascribed to ScYLAX of Caryanda, but really ' 
the work of an unknown writer belonging to the time of Philip of Macedon. 
Ed. D. HoESCHEL, August. Vind., 1608. Printed also in Hudson's Geographi 
Minores, Oxoniis, 1703 ; and in C, Muller's Geographi Grceci Minores, Paris, 
1855. 

Str^bo, Geographica, in seventeen books, the most important ancient work 
on the subject. Best editions: that of Is. Casaubon, Parisiis, 1620, fol. ; that 
of Th. Falconer, Oxoniis, 1807, 2 vols, folio; that of Siebenkees, Lipsiae, 
1796-1811, 6 vols. Svo. ; and that of Kramer, Berolini, 1847-52, 3 vols. 8vOr 



INTRODUCTION. 9 

DlONYSlus, Periegesis, written in hexameter verse. Published, with the 
commentary of Eustathius, by H. Stephanus. Parisiis, 1577. It will be found 
also in the Geographi Grceci Minores of BERNHARDT (Leipsic, 1828) and of 
C. MtJLLER. 

Plinius, Historia Naturalis, in thirty-seven books. Best edition, that of 
SiLLlG. Gothse ; 8 vols. Bvo. 

PxoLEMiEUS, Geographia, in eight books. Ed. Bertius, Amstel., 1618; 
folio. 

POMPONIUS Mela, Cosmographia, sive De Situ Orbis, in three books. Edited 
by H. Stephanus, together with the Periegesis of DIONYSIUS. Parisiis, 1577. 
Best edition, that of Tzschucke. Lipsiae, 1807 ; 7 vols. 8vo. 

And for the geography of Greece — 

Pausanias, Periegesis Helladis, in ten books. Best editions : that of Siebelis , 
Lipsi«, 1822-8, 5 vols., 8vo. ; and that of Bekker, Berlin, 1826-7, 2 vols. 8vo. 

Modern works on the subject of Ancient Geography are nume- 
rous, but only a few are of a general character. Among these may 
be noticed — 

Cellarius, Notitia Orbis Antiqui. Lipsiae, 170 1-6; 2 vols. 4to. Cum 
observationibus J. C. SCHWARTZII. Lipsiae, 1771 and 1773. 

Mannert, Geographic der Griechen und Romer. Niimberg, 180 1-3 1 ; 10 vols. 
8vo. 

GOSSELIN, Recherches sur la Geographie systematique et positi've des Anciens. 
Paris, 1798-1813 ; 4 vols. 4to. 

'^'S^v.Y.iJL,^., Geography of Herodotus. London, 1800; 4to. And the same 
writer's Treatise on the Comparati-ve Geography of Asia Minor, with an Atlas. 
London, 1831 ; 2 vols. 8vo. 

RiTTER, Erdkunde. Berlin, 1832 et seqq. A most copious and learned work, 
embracing all the results of modern discovery up to the date of the publication 
of each volume. 

Smith, Dr. W., Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography. London, 1854; 
2 vols. 8vo. 

Among useful compendiums are — 

Laurent, P. E., Introduction to Ancient Geography. Oxford, 1813 ; 8vo. 
Arrowsmith, a.. Compendium of Ancient and Modern Geography , for the use 
of Eton School. London, 1830; 8vo. 

The best Atlases illustrative of Ancient Geography are the 
following : — 

Kiepert, Atlas von Hellas, with supplementary maps. Berlin, 1846-51. 
Also the same geographer's Atlas Antiquus. Berlin, i86i. 

MiJLLER, C, Maps accompanying the Geographi Grceci Minores. Paris, 1855. 
Johnston, A. Keith, Atlas of Classical Geography. Edinburgh, 1866 ; 4to. 
Smith, Dr. W., Biblical and Classical Atlas. London, 1868 ; small folio. 

13. The field of Ancient History may be mapped out either 
synchronistically, according to certain periods and epochs, or 
ethnographically, according to states and nations. Neither of 
these two methods is absolutely superior to the other, each having 
merits in which the other is deficient. It would be embarrassing 
to have to choose between them ; but, fortunately, this difficulty 



lo ANCIENT HISTORY. 

is obviated by the possibility of combining the two into one 
system. This combined method, which has been already pre- 
ferred as most convenient by other writers of Manuals, will be 
adopted in the ensuing pages, where the general division of the 
subject will be as follows : — 

Book I. — History of the Ancient Asiatic and African States 
and Kingdoms from the Earliest Times to the Foundation of the 
Persian Monarchy by Cyrus the Great, b. c. 558. 

Book II. — History of the Persian Monarchy from the Accession 
of Cyrus to the Death of Darius Codomannus, b. c. 558-330. 

Book III. — History of the Grecian States, both in Greece 
Proper and elsewhere, from the Earliest Times to the Accession 
of Alexander, b. c. o^'^6. 

Book IV. — History of the Macedonian Monarchy, and the 
Kingdoms into which it broke up, until, their absorption into the 
Roman Empire. 

Book V. — History of Rome from the Earliest Times to the 
Fall of the Western Empire, a. d. 476, and Parallel History of 
Parthia. 



BOOK I. 



HISTORY OF THE ANCIENT ASIATIC AND AFRICAN STATES 
AND KINGDOMS FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES TO THE FOUNDA- 
TION OF THE PERSIAN MONARCHY BY CYRUS THE GREAT. 



PART I. ASIATIC NATIONS. 

A. Preliminary Remarks on the Geography of Asia. 

I. Asia is the largest of the three great divisions of the 
Eastern Hemisphere. Regarding it as separated from Africa 
by the Red Sea and Isthmus of Suez, and from Asia— size 
Europe by the Ural mountains, the Ural river, the ^^^ situation. 
Caspian Sea, and the main chain of the Caucasus, its superficial 
contents will amount to 17,500,000 square miles, whereas those 
of Africa are less than 13,000,000, and those of Europe do not 
exceed 3,800,000. In climate it unites greater varieties than 
either of the two other divisions^ extending as it does from the 
78th degree of north latitude to within a hundred miles of the 
equator. It thus lies mainly within the northern temperate zone, 
but projects northwards a distance of eleven degrees beyond the 
Arctic circle, while southwards it throws into the region of the 
Tropics three long and broad peninsulas. 

The advantages of Asia over Africa'are great. Note especially the indenta- 
tion of the shores, the numerous littoral islands, the great number of large 
rivers, and the comparatively small amount of sandy desert. Its advantages 
over Europe are less, consisting chiefly in its far larger size, and the greater 
variety of its products. 



12' ANCIENT HISTORY. [book i. 

2. Asia consists mainly of a great central table-land, running 
east and west from the neighbourhood of the ^gean to the north- 
Physical western frontier of China, with low plains sur- 
eatures. rounding it, which are for the most part fertile 

and well watered. The high table-land is generally -bounded by 

mountain-chains, which mostly run parallel to it in latitudinal 

lines. In places these primary latitudinal chains give way to 

others, which run in an opposite or longitudinal direction. 

Among the latitudinal chains the most important are— in the west, Taurus, 
Olympus, and Niphates ; in the central region, Paropamisus (Elburz), and the 
four parallel chains of the Kuen-liin, the Himalaya (Imseus), the Thian-chan, 
and the Altai ; while in the extreme east are the Chinese ranges of the In-chan, 
the Nan-chan, and the Kilian-chan. In the reverse or longitudinal direction 
run the Ural, separating Europe from Asia ; the Zagros range, bounding the 
Mesopotamian plain on the east ; the Suliman and Hala ranges, shutting in the 
Indus valley on the west ; the Bolor chain, connecting the Himalaya with the 
Thian-chan ; the eastern and western Ghauts in the peninsula of Hindustan ; 
the Dzangbo-tchu of Burmah ; the Yun-ling, Ala-chan, and Khingan of China ; 
and the Jablonnoi of Siberia, in the region between Kamtchatka and Man- 
churia. , 

3. The Bivers of Asia may be divided into two classes — those of 

the central tract, and those of the circumjacent regions. The 

rivers of the central tract are continental or medlter- 
Rivers. 

ranean ; i.e. they begin and end without reaching 

the sea. Either they form after a while salt lakes in which their 
waters are evaporated, or they gradually waste away and lose 
themselves in the sands of deserts. The rivers of the circum- 
jacent plains are, on the contrary, oceanic ,• i.e. they mingle them- 
selves with the waters of the great deep. 

To the class of continental rivers belong the Ural and the Aras (Araxes), 
which flow into the Caspian ; the Sir-Daria or Syhun (Jaxartes) and the Amoo 
or Jyhun (Oxus), which fall into the Sea of Aral ; the Heri-rud (Arius), or 
river of Herat ; the Zende-rud, or river of Isfahan ; the Bendamir, or river of 
Persepolis ; the Helmend (Etymandrus), the chief stream of AfFghanistan ; the 
Dehas, or river of Balkh ; . the Ak-Su, or river of Bokhara ; the Kashgar river ; 
the Jordan, and others. The most important of the Oceanic streams are the 
Obi or Irtish, the Yenisei, and the Lena, which drain the northern or Siberian 
plain, and flow into the Arctic Ocean ; the Amoor, the Hoang-Ho, and the 
Yang-tse-kiang, which drain the eastern plain, and fall into the North Pacific ; 
the May-kiang or Cambodia, the Meinam, and the Irrawaddy, the rivers of 
Siam and Burmah ; the Brahmaputra, Ganges, and Indus, the great rivers of 
India ; and the Tigris and Euphrates, the rivers of Mesopotamia ; which all 
flow southwards into the Indian Ocean. Of these streams only the following 
were known to the ancients — the Tigris, the Euphrates, the Indus, the Ety- 
mandrus, the Arius, the Oxus, the Jaxartes, the Araxes (Aras), and the Jordan. 
Minor streams important in Ancient History are — the Halys (Kizil-Irmak), 
Hermus (Ghiediz Chai), and Maeander (Mendere), in Asia Minor ; the Orontes 
(Nahr-el-Asy) in Syria ; the Phasis (Rion^ in Imeritia and Mingrelia ; and the 
Pasitigris (Kuran), the Hedypnus (Jerrahi), and the Oroatis (Tab or Hindyan), 
in Susiana and Persia Proper. 



PARTI.] ASIATIC NATIONS. 13 

4. Asia may conveniently be divided into Northern, Central, 
and Southern, the Southern region being again sub- Natural 
divided into a Western and an Eastern portion. divisions. 

It is with South -Western Asia that Ancient History is almost 
exclusively concerned. 

5. Northern Asia, or the tract lying north of the Caspian Sea, 
the Jaxartes, and the Altai mountain-chain, is for the most part 
a great grassy plain, of low elevation, destitute of Northern 
trees, and unproductive, the layer of vegetable soil ^^i^- 
being thin. Towards the north this plain merges into vast frozen 
wilds capable of nourishing only a few hunters. In the west the 
Ural and Altai, in the east the Jablonnoi, and their offshoot the 
Tukulan, are the only mountains. The rivers are numerous, and 
abound in fish. The Ural and Altai chains are rich in valuable 
minerals, as gold, silver, platina, copper, and iron. This region 
was almost unknown to the ancients, who included it under 
the vague name of Scythia. Some scanty notices of it occur, 
however, in Herodotus. 

6. Central Asia, or the region bounded on the north by the 

Altai, on the west by the Caspian, on the south by the Elburz, 

the Hindu Kush, and the Himalaya, on the east by 

Central Asia 
the Yun-Iing and other Chinese ranges, consists, 

excepting in its more western portion, of an elevated plateau 

or table-land, which towards the south is not less than 10,000 

feet, and towards the north is from 4000 to 3600 feet above the 

level of the sea. This plateau is intersected by the two great 

chains of the Thian-chan and the Kuen-liin, and otherwise 

diversified by important ridges. Towards the north the soil 

admits of pasturage, and in the west and south are some rich 

plains and valleys ; but the greater part of the region consists of 

sandy deserts. Outside the western boundary of the plateau, 

which is formed by the Bolor and other 'longitudinal' chains, 

a low plain succeeds, a continuation of the Siberian steppe, 

which consists also, in the main, of sandy desert, excepting along 

the courses of the streams. 

The low deserts between the Caspian and the Bolor are known under the 
names of Kharesm and Kizil Koum. The great sandy desert of the elevated 
central region is called Gobi or Gobi in its western, and Shamoo in its more 
eastern portions. It has a general direction from S.W.W. to N.E. E., and is 
estimated to contain 600,000 square miles, or about three times the area of 
France. It comprises, however, some oases where there is good pasturage. 



14 ANCIENT HISTORY. [book i. 

A small portion only of Central Asia — lying towards the west 
and the south-west — was known to the ancients. In the low 
region between the Elburz range and the Siberian steppe, upon 
the courses of the two great streams which flow down from the 
plateau, were three countries of some importance. These were — 

i. Chorasmiay to the extreme west, between the Caspian and 
the lower Oxus, — a desolate region, excepting close along the 
river-bank, known still as Kharesm_, and forming part of the 
Khanat of Khiva, 

ii. Sogdiamay between the lower Oxus and the lower Jaxartes, 
resembling Chorasmia in its western portion, but towards the east 
traversed by spurs of the Bolor and the Thian-chan, and watered 
by numerous streams descending from them. The chief of these 
was the Polytimetus of the Greeks, on which was Maracanda 
(Samarkand), the capital. 

iii. Bactria^ on the upper Oxus, between Sogdiana and the Paro- 
pamisus (Hindu Kush), Mountainous,' fertile, and well watered 
towards the east, but towards the west descending into the desert. 
Chief cities, Bactra (Balkh), the capital, a little south of the Oxus, 
and Margus (Merv), on a stream of its own, in the western 
desert. 

Tradition makes Bactria a country of great importance at a remote date, 
and there is some reason to believe that Bactra, its capital, was the first great 
city of the Arian race. Some moderns have reported that the bricks of 
Balkh bear cuneiform inscriptions ; but as yet the site is very partially explored. 

7. Soutliern Asia, according to the division of the continent 
which has been here preferred, comprises all the countries lying 
Southern ft^tftli- of the Black Sea, the Caucasus, the Caspian, 
Asia. and the Elburz, Hindu Kush, and Himalaya ranges, 
together with those lying east of the Yun-ling, the Ala-chan, and 
the Khingan, which form the eastern boundary of the central 
table-land. A line drawn along the ninety-second meridian 
(E. from Greenwich) will separate this tract, at the point where 
it is narrowest, into an Eastern and Western region, the former 
containing Manchuria, China, and the Siamo-Burmese peninsula, 
the latter Hindustan, AfFghanistan, Beluchistan, Persia, the 
Russian Transcaucasian provinces, Turkey in Asia, and Arabia. 
With the Eastern region Ancient History has no concern at all, 
since it was unknown to the great nations of antiquity, and 
whatever history it has belongs to the Modern rather than to 



PAKTi.] ASIATIC NATIONS. 15 

the Ancient period. (See above, Introduction, § 3.) With the 
Western region Ancient History is, on the contrary, concerned 
vitally and essentially, since this region formed in the early times, 
if not the sole, yet at any rate the chief, stage on which the 
historical drama was exhibited. 

Revelation, tradition, and the indications derivable from ethnology and 
comparative philology, agree in pointing to this South- Western region as 
the cradle of the human race. The soil, climate, and natural productions 
are such as would have suited man in his infancy. Here, and in the adjoining 
part of Africa, large communities were first formed, cities built, and govern- 
ments established. Here was the birthplace of agriculture and the arts ; and 
here trade and commerce first acquired any considerable development. 
Numerous streams, a rich soil, abundant and most valuable natural products, 
among which the first place must be assigned to the wheat plant, here alone 
indigenous, rendered this portion of the earth's surface better fitted than per- 
haps any other for encouraging and promoting civilisation. Here accordingly 
civil history commenced, the earliest Kingdoms and States being, all of them, 
in this quarter. 

8. South-Western Asia is naturally divisible into four main 
regions — viz. {a) Asia Minor, or the peninsula of Anatolia- (^) 
the adjoining table-land, or the tract which lies Regions of 
between Asia Minor and the Valley of the Indus j westem 
(c) the lowland south of this table-land, which Asia, 
stretches from the base of the mountains to the shores of the 
Indian Ocean ; and {d) the Indian Peninsula. 

{a) Asia Minor consists of a central table-land of moderate 
elevation, lying between the two parallel chains of Taurus and 
Olympus, together with three coast-tracts, situated 

.\ , , ,^,, Asia Minor. 

respectively north, west, and south of the plateau. 
Its chief rivers are the Iris (Yechil Irmak), the Halys (Kizil Irmak), 
and the Sangarius (Sakkariyeh), which all fall into the Euxine. 
Its loftiest mountain is Argseus, near Caesaraea (Kaisariyeh), which 
attains an altitude of 13,000 feet. On the highest part of the 
plateau, which is towards the south, adjoining Taurus, are a number 
of salt lakes, into which the rivers of this region empty themselves. 
The largest is the Palus Tattseus (Touz Ghieul), which extends 
about forty-five miles in its greatest length. Asia Minor contained 
in the times anterior to Cyrus the following countries : — On the 
plateau, two: Phiygia and Cappadocia; boundary between them, 
the Halys. In the northern coast-tract, two: Paphlagonia and 
Bithynia- boundary, the Billseus (Filiyas). In the western coast- 
tract, three: Mysia, Lydia, and Caria, with the ^olian, Ionian, 
and Dorian Greeks occupying most of the sea-board. In the 



1 6 ANCIENT HISTORY. [book r, 

southern coast-tract, three : Lycia, Pamphylia, and Cilicia. The 
chief cities were Sardis, the capital of Lydia; Dascyleium, of 
Bithynia^ Gordium, of Phrygiaj Xanthus, of Lycia, Tarsus, of 
Cilicia J and Mazaca (afterwards Csesaraea), of Cappadocia; 
together with the Grecian settlements of Miletus, Phocaea, 
Ephesus, Smyrna, Halicarnassus, and Cnidus on the west, and 
Cyzicus, Heraclea, Sinope, Amisus, Cerasus, and Trapezus upon 
the north. 

Islands. The littoral islands belonging to Asia Minor were 
important and numerous. The principal were Proconnesus in the 
Propontis ; Tenedos, Lesbos (capital Mytilene), ChioSj Samos, and 
Rhodes, in the ^Egean- and Cyprus in the Levant or Eastern 
Mediterranean. The chief towns of Cyprus were Salamis, Citium, 
and Paphos, on the coast 3 and^ in the interior, Idalium. 

{h) The great higliland extending from Asia Minor in the 
west to the mountains which border the Indus Valley in the 

The central east, comprised seventeen countries : — viz. Armenia, 
highland. Iberia or Sapeiria, Colchis, Matiene, Media, Persia, 
Mycia_, Sagartia^ Cadusia, Hyrcania, Parthia, Aria, Arachosia, 
Sattagydia, Gandaria, Sarangia, and Gedrosia or the Eastern 
Ethiopia. As these countries were mostly of considerable size 
and importance, a short description will be given of each. 

i. Armenia lay east of Cappadocia. It was a lofty region, 
consisting almost entirely of mountains, and has been well called 
'the Switzerland of Western Asia.' The mountain system 
culminates in Ararat, which has an elevation of 17,000 feet. 
Hence all the great rivers of this part of Asia take their rise, 
viz. the Tigris, the Euphrates, the Halys, the Araxes, and the 
Cyrus. In the highest part of the region occur two elevated lake- 
basins, those of Urumiyeh and Van, each having a distinct and 
separate water-system of its own. The only town anciently of 
much importance was one which occupied the position of the 
modern Van, on the east coast of the lake of the same name. 

ii. Iberia.^ or Sapeiria, adjoined Armenia to the north-east. 
It comprised the whole of the modern Georgia, together with 
some parts of Russian and Turkish Armenia, as especially the 
region about Kars, Ispir, and Akhaltsik. Its rivers were the 
Cyrus (Kur) and Araxes (Aras), which flow together into the 
Caspian. It had one lake. Lake Goutcha or Sivan, in the moun- 
tain region north-east of Ararat. 



PAKTi.] ASIATIC NATIONS. 17 

iii. Colchisj or the valley of the Phasis, between the Caucasus 
and Western Iberia, corresponded to the modern districts of 
Imeritia, Mingrelia, and Guriel. Its chief importance lay in 
its commanding one of the main routes of early commerce, which 
passed by way of the Oxus, Caspian, Aras, and Phasis to the 
Euxine. (Connect with this the Argonautic expedition.) Chief 
town, Pliasis, at the mouth of the Rion river, a Greek settle- 
ment. Natives of Colchis, black : believed to be Egyptians. 

iv. Matiene was a strip of mountain land, running southward 
from Sapeiria, and separating between Assyria and Media Magna. 
It early lost its name, and was reckoned to one or other of the 
adjoining countries. 

V. Media^ one of the largest and most important of the regions 
belonging to this group, extended from the Araxes on the north 
to the desert beyond Isfahan on the south. Eastward it reached 
to the Caspian Gates ^ westward it was bounded by Matiene, or 
(when Matiene disappeared) by Armenia and Assyria. Its chief 
rivers were the Araxes (Aras) and the Mardus (Kizil Uzen or 
Sefid-rud). It consisted of two regions. Northern Media, or 
Media Atropatene (Azerbijan), and Southern Media, or Media 
Magna. The whole territory was mountainous, except towards 
the south-east, where it abutted on the Sagartian desert. The 
soi was mostly sterile, but some tracts were fairly, and a few 
ricl ily, productive. The chief cities were Ecbatana and Rhages. 

vi. Persia lay south and south-east of Media, extending from 
the Median frontier across the Zagros mountain-chain, to the 
shores of the gulf whereto it gave name. It was barren and 
unfruitful towards the north and east, where it ran into the 
Sagartian desert ; mountainous and fairly fertile in the central 
region j and a tract of arid sand along the coast. Its rivers were 
few and of small size. Two, the Oroatis (Tab) and Granis 
(Khisht river), flowed southwards into the Persian Gulf- one 
the Araxes (Bendamir), with its tributary the Cyrus (Pulwar) 
ran eastward, and terminated in a salt lake (Neyriz or Bakhtigan) 
The principal cities were Persepolis, Pasargadse, and Carmana 
which last was the capital of a district of Persia, called Carmania 

vii. Mjda was a small tract south-east of Persia, on the shores 
of the Persian Gulf, opposite the island of Kishm and the pro- 
montory of Ras Mussendum. It was ultimately absorbed into 
Persia Proper. 

c 



1 8 ANCIENT HISTORY. [book i. 

viii. Sagartia was at once the largest and the most thinly 
peopled of the plateau countries. It comprised the whole of 
the great desert of Iran, which reaches from Kashan and Koum 
on the west to Sarawan and Quettah towards the east, a distance 
of above 900 miles. It was bounded on the north by Media, 
Parthia, and Aria ; on the east by Sarangia and Sattagydia ; on 
the south by Mycia and the Eastern Ethiopia; on the west by 
Media and Persia. It contained in ancient times no city of im- 
portance, the inhabitants being nomads, whose flocks found a 
scanty pasturage on the less barren portions of the great upland. 

ix. Cadusta^ or the country of the Cadusians, was a thin strip 
of territory along the south-eastern and southern shores of the 
Caspian, corresponding to the modern Ghilan and Mazanderan. 
Strictly speaking, it scarcely belonged to the plateau, since it lay 
outside the Elburz range, on the northern slopes of the chain, and 
between them and the Caspian Sea. It contained no • city of 
importance, but was fertile, well wooded, and well watered ; and 
sustained a numerous population. 

X. Hyrcania lay east of Cadusia, at the south-eastern corner of 
the Caspian, where the name still exists in the modern river 
Gurgan. The chain of the Elburz here broadens out to a width 
of 200 miles, and a fertile region is formed containing many 
rich valleys and high mountain pastures, together with some 
considerable plains. The chief city of Hyrcania was Zadra- 
carta. 

xi. Farthia lay south and south-east of Hyrcania, including the 
sunny flank of the Elburz chain, and the flat country at its base 
as far as the northern edge of the desert, where it bordered on 
Sagartia. It was a narrow but fertile territory, watered by the 
numerous streams which here descend from the mountains. 

xii. Aria, the modern territory of Herat, adjoined Parthia on 
the east. It was a small but fertile tract on the river Arius (the 
Heri-rud), with a capital city, called Aria or Artacoana (Herat). 

xiii. Arachosia^ east of Aria, comprised most of Western and 
Central Affghanistan. Its rivers were the Etymandrus (Helmend) 
and the Arachotus (Arghand-ab). The capital was Arachotus 
(Kandahar ?). It was an extensive country, mountainous and 
generally barren, but containing a good deal of fair pasturage, 
and a few fertile vales, 

xiv. Sattagydia adjoined Arachosia on the east, corresponding 



PAETi.] ASIATIC A^ATIONS. 19 

to South-Eastern AfFghanistan, or the tract between Kandahar 
and the Indus valley. In character it closely resembled Ara- 
chosia, but was on the whole wilder and more rugged. 

XV. Gandaria lay above Sattagydia, comprising the modern 
Kabul and Kaferistan. It consisted of a mass of tangled moun- 
tain-chains, with fertile valleys between them, often, however, 
narrowing to gorges difficult to penetrate. Its principal stream 
was the Cophen (or river of Kabul), a tributary of the Indus, 
and its chief town Caspatyrus (Kabul ?). 

xvi. Sarangia^ or Zarangia, was the tract lying about the salt 
lake (Hamoon) into which the Etymandrus (Helmend) empties 
itself. This tract is flat, and generally desert, except along the 
courses of the many streams which flow into the Hamoon from 
the north and east. 

xvii. Gedrosia corresponded to the modern Beluchistan. It lay 
south of Sarangia, Arachosia, and Sattagydia, and east of Sagartia 
and Mycia. On the east its boundary was the Indus valley j on 
the south it was washed by the Indian Ocean. It was a region 
of alternate rock and sand, very scantily watered, and almost 
entirely destitute of wood. The chief town was Pura (perhaps 
Bunpoor). 

{c) The lowland to the south, or rather the south-west, of the 
great West-Asian plateau, comprised five countries -pj^g southern 
only : — viz. Syria, Arabia, Assyria, Susis or Susiana, lowland, 
and Babylonia. Each of these requires a short notice. 

i. Syriuj bounded by Cilicia on the north, the Euphrates on the 
north-east, the Arabian desert on the south-east and south, and 
by the Levant upon the west, comprised the following regions. 
I St. Syria Froper^ or the tract reaching from Amanus to Hermon 
and Palmyra. Chief cities in the ante-Cyrus period : Carchemish, 
Hamath, Damascus, Baalbek^ and Tadmor or Palmyra. Chief 
river, the Orontes. Mountains : Casius, Bargylus, Libanus, and 
anti-Libanus. 2nd. Fhcenkiaj the coast tract from the thirty-fifth 
to the thirty-third parallel, separated from Syria Proper by the ridge 
of Libanus. Chief towns : Tyre, Sidon, Berytus, Byblus, Tripolis, 
Aradus. 3rd. Talestme^ comprising Galilee, Samaria, Judaea, and 
Philistia, or Palestine Proper. Chief cities : Jerusalem, Samaria, 
Azotus or Ashdod, Ascalon, and Gaza or Cadytis. Mountains : 
Hermon, Carmel. River, Jordan. Northern and Western Syria 
are mountainous, and generally fertile. Eastern Syria is an arid 

c % 



20 ANCIENT HISTORY, [book i. 

desert, broken only by a few oases, of which the Palmyrene is the 
principal. 

ii. Arabia lay south and south-east of Syria. It was a country 
of enormous size, being estimated to contain a million of square 
miles, or more than one-fourth the area of Europe. Consisting, 
however, as it does, mainly of sandy or rocky deserts, its popula- 
tion must always have been scanty, and its productions few. In 
the ancient world it was never of much account, the inhabitants 
being mainly nomads, and only the outlying tribes coming into 
contact with the neighbouring nations. The only important towns 
were, in the east, Gerrha, a great trading settlement ^ in the west, 
Petra and Elath. 

iii. Assyria intervened between Syria and Media. It was 
bounded on the north by the snowy chain of Niphates, which 
separated it from Armenia, and on the east by the outer ranges 
of Zagros. Westward its limit was the Euphrates, while south- 
ward it adjoined on Babylonia and Susi'ana. Towards the north 
and east it included some mountain tracts ; but in the main, it 
was a great rolling plain, at a low level, scantily watered towards 
the west, where the Euphrates has few affluents, but well supplied 
towards the east, where Mount Zagros sends down many large 
streams to join the Tigris. Its chief cities were Ninus, or 
Nineveh, Calah, and Asshur upon the Tigris; Arbela in the 
region between the Tigris and Mount Zagros ; Nisibis, Amida, 
Harran or Carrhse, and Circesium in the district between the 
great rivers. Its streams, besides the Tigris and Euphrates, were 
the Bilichus (Belik) and the Chaboras (Western Khabour), affluents 
of the Euphrates; the Centrites (Bitlis Chai), the Eastern Khabour, 
the Zabatus (or Zab Ala), the Caprus (or Zab Asfal), and the 
Gyndes or Physcus (Diyaleh), tributaries of the Tigris. It con- 
tained on the north the mountain range of Masius (Jebel Tur and 
Karajah Dagh) . Its chief districts were Aturia, or Assyria Proper, 
the tract about Nineveh ; Adiabene, the country between the 
Upper Zab and the Lower; Chalonitis, the region south of the 
Lower Zab; and Gozan (or Mygdonia) on the Western Khabour 
at the foot of the Mons Masius. The Greeks called the whole 
tract between the two great rivers Mesopotamia. 

iv. Susis^ Susiana or Cissia, lay south-east of Assyria, and con- 
sisted chiefly of the low plain between the Zagros range and the 
Tigris, but comprised also a portion of the mountain region. Its 



PART I.] ASIATIC NATIONS. 21 

rivers were the Choaspes (Kerkheh), the Pasitigris (Kuran), the 
Eulaeus (a branch stream formerly running from the Choaspes into 
the Pasitigris), and the Hedypnus (Jerrahi). Capital city, Susa, 
between the Choaspes and Eulaeus rivers. 

V. Bahy Ionia lay due south of Assyria, in which it was sometimes 
included. The line of demarcation between them was the limit 
of the alluvium. On the east Babylonia was bounded by Susiana, 
on the west by Arabia, and on the south by the Persian Gulf. It 
was a single alluvial plain of vast extent and extraordinary fertility. 
The chief cities, besides Babylon on the Euphrates, were Ur (now 
Mugheir), Erech (Warka), Calneh (NifFer), Cutha (Ibrahim), Sip- 
para or Sepharvaim (Mosaib), and Borsippa (Birs-Nimrud) . The 
more southern part of Babylonia, bordering on Arabia and the 
Persian Gulf, was known as Chaldaea. 

(d) The Peninsula of Hindustan, the last of the four great 
divisions of South- Western Asia, contains nearly a million and 
a quarter of square miles. Nature has divided it -p^e Indian 
into three very distinct tracts, one towards the peninsula, 
north-west, consisting of the basin drained by the Indus; one 
towards the east, or the basin drained by the Ganges ; and 
one towards the south, or the peninsula proper. Of these the 
north-western only was connected with the history of the ancient 
world. 

This tract, called India from the river on which it lay, was 
separated oiF from the rest of Hindustan by a broad belt of desert. 
It comprised two regions — 1st, that known in modern times as 
the Punjab, abutting immediately on the Himalaya chain, and con- 
taining about 50,000 square miles ; a vast triangular plain, inter- 
sected by the courses of five great rivers (whence Punj-ab = Five 
Rivers), — the Indus, the Hydaspes (Jelum), the Acesines (Chenab), 
the Hydraotes (Ravee), and the Hyphasis (Sutlej), — fertile along 
their course, but otherwise barren, andly, the region known as 
Scinde, or the Indus valley below the Punjab, a tract of about 
the same size, including the rich plain of Cutchi Gandava on 
the west bank of the river, and the broad delta of the Indus 
towards the south. Chief town of the upper region, Taxila 
(Attok) ; of the southern, Pattala (Tatta ?). 



22 ANCIENT HISTORY. [book i. 



B. Preliminary Observations on the General Character of 
the Early Asiatic Kingdoms. 

I . The physical conformation of Western Asia is favourable to 

the growth of large empires. In the vast plain which extends from 

T . the foot of Niphates and Zagros to the Persian Gulf- 
Large size r & 3 

of the the Red Sea, and the Mediterranean, there are no 
mg oms. natural fastnesses ; and the race which is numerically 
or physically superior to the other races inhabiting it readily 
acquires dominion over the entire region. Similarly, only not 
quite to the same extent^ in the upland region which succeeds to 
this plain upon the east, there is a deficiency of natural barriers, 
and the nation which once begins to excel its neighbours, rapidly 
extends its influence over a wide stretch of territory. The upland 
and lowland powers are generally pretty evenly balanced, and 
maintain a struggle in which neither side gives way; but occa- 
sionally the equality becomes deranged. Circumstances give to 
the one or to the other additional strength ; and the result is, that 
its rival is overpowered. Then an empire of still greater extent is 
formed, both upland and lowland falling under the sway of the 
same people. 

1. Still more remarkable than this uniformity of size is the 

uniformity of governmental type observable throughout all these 

Despotism empires. The form of government is in every 

* of ^°overii™ ^^^^ ^ monarchy ; the monarchy is always here- 

ment. ditary; and the hereditary monarch is a despot. A 
few feeble checks are in some instances devised for the purpose 
of restraining within certain limits the caprice or the cruelty 
of the holder of power j but these barriers, where they exist, 
are easily overleaped; and in most cases there is not even any 
such semblance of interference with the will of the ruler, who 
is the absolute master of the lives, liberties, and property of his 
subjects. Despotism is the simplest, coarsest, and rudest of all the 
forms of civil government. It was thus naturally the first which 
men, pressed by a sudden need, extemporised. And in Asia the 
wish has never arisen to improve upon this primitive and im- 
perfect essay. 

Note as exceptional the power which their independent religious position 



PARTI.] ASIATIC NATIONS. 23 

gave to the Jewish High Priests — a power which, however, would have been 
trampled upon if it had not been upheld by miracle. (See 2 Chron. xxvi. 
16-21.) 

3. Some variety is observable in the internal organisation of the 
empires. In the remoter times it was regarded as sufficient to 
receive the personal submission of the . monarch Differences 
whose land was conquered, to assess his tribute internal 

at a certain amount, and then to leave him in organisation, 
the unmolested enjoyment of his former dignity. The head of 
an empire was thus a 'king of kings,' and the empire itself 
was an aggregation of kingdoms. After a while an improvement 
was made on the simplicity of this early system. Ssrtraps, 
or provincial governors, court officials belonging to the conquering 
nation, and holding their office only during the good pleasure of 
the Great King, were substituted for the native monarchs ; and 
arrangements, more or less complicated, were devised for checking 
and controlling them in the exercise of their authority. The 
power of the head of the empire was thus considerably increased ; 
and the empire acquired a stability unknown under the previous 
system. Uniformity of administration was to a certain extent 
secured. At the same time, a very great diversity underlay this 
external uniformity, since the conquered nations were generally 
suffered to retain their own language, religion, and usages. No 
effort was made even to interfere with their laws • and thus the 
provinces continued, after the lapse of centuries, as separate and 
distinct in tone, feeling, ideas, and aspirations, as at the time 
when they were conquered. The sense of separateness was never 
lost- the desire of recovering national independence, at best, 
slumbered; nothing was wanted but opportunity to stir up the 
dormant feelings and to shatter the seeming unity of the empire 
into a thousand fragments. 

4. A characteristic of the Oriental monarchies, which very 
markedly distinguishes them from the kingdoms of the West, is 
the prevalence of polygamy. The polygamy of Prevalence of 
the monarch swells to excessive numbers the ^°ts^evil^' 
hangers-on of the court, necessitates the build- influence. 
ing of a vast palace, encourages effeminacy and luxury, causes 
the annual outlay of enormous sums on the maintenance of the 
royal household, introduces a degraded and unnatural class of 
human beings into positions of trust and dignity; in a word, at 



24 ANCIENT HISTORY. [book i. 

once saps the vital force of the empire in its central citadel^ and 
imposes heavy burthens on the mass of the population^ which tend 
to produce exhaustion and paralysis of the whole body politic. 
The practice of polygamy among the upper classes^ destroying the 
domestic affections by diluting them^ degrades and injures the 
moral character of those who give its tone to the nation, lowers 
their physical energy, and renders them self-indulgent and in- 
dolent. Nor do the lower classes, though their poverty saves them 
from participating directly in the evil, escape unscathed. Yielding, 
as they commonly do, to the temptation of taking money for their 
daughters from the proprietors of harems, they lose by degrees all 
feeiiflg of self-respect j the family bond, corrupted in its holiest 
element, ceases to have an elevating influence ; and the traffickers 
in their own flesh and blood become the ready tools of tyrants, the 
ready applauders of crime, and the submissive victims of every 
kind of injustice and oppression. 

5. The Asiatic Empires were always founded upon conquest; 
and conquest implies the possession of military qualities in the 

Other causes ^i^tors superior at any rate to those of the van- 
of decline quished nations. Usually the conquering people 
were at first simple in their habits, brave, hardy, 
and, comparatively speaking, poor. The immediate consequence 
of their victory was the exchange of poverty for riches; and 
riches usually brought in their train the evils of luxurious living 
and idleness. The conquerors .rapidly deteriorated under such 
influences; and, if it had not been for the common practice of 
confining the use of arms, either wholly or mainly, to their own 
class, they might, in a very few generations, have had to change 
places with their subjects. Even in spite of this practice 
they continually decreased in courage and warlike spirit. The 
monarchs usually ho-cSiVCLQ faineants , and confined themselves to the 
precincts of the palace. The nobles left off altogether the habit 
of athletic exercise. Military expeditions grew to be infrequent. 
When they became a necessity in consequence of revolt or of 
border ravages, the deficiencies of the native troops had to be sup- 
plied by the employment of foreign mercenaries, who cared nothing 
for the cause in which their swords were drawn. Meanwhile, the 
conquerors were apt to quarrel among themselves. Great satraps 
would revolt and change their governments into independent 
sovereignties. Pretenders to the crown would start up among the 



PABTi.] ASIATIC NATIONS. 25 

monarch's nearest relatives, and the strength and resources of the 
state would be wasted in civil conflicts. The extortion of pro- 
vincial governors exliausted the provinces, while the corruption of 
the court weakened the empire at its centre. Still, the tottering 
edifice would stand for years, or even for centuries, if there was no 
attack from abroad, by a mere vis inerttce ^ but, sooner or later, 
such an attack was sure to come, and then the unsubstantial fabric 
gave way at once and crumbled to dust under a few blows vigour- 
ously dealt by a more warlike nation. 



C. History of the Ancient Asiatic Kingdo^ns previous 

to Cyrus. 

Sources. 1. Native : including {a) the cuneiform inscriptions of Chaldaea, 
Assyria, and Armenia ; and {P) the fragments of Berosus. 2. Jewish : inckid- 
ing the historical books from Genesis to Chronicles, and the works of the - 
Prophets anterior to Gyrus. 3. Classical writers : as Herodotus, Ctesias, Dio- 
dorus Siculus, and Justin ; with the later chronologers, Eusebius and Syncellus. 
Specimens of the inscriptions themselves have been published in the British 
Museum Series, edited by Sir H. Rawlinson and Mr. E. NoRRiS (London, 
i860). A large number have been translated by M. Oppert, in his Inscriptions 
des Sargonides (Paris, 1862). The fragments of Berosus have been collected by 
Mons. C. MiJLLER, and will be found in the Fragmenta Historicorum Grcecorum, 
vol. ii. (Paris, 1848). The fragments of Ctesias have been collected by Bahr 
(Frankfurt, 1824), C. MiJLLER (Paris, 1844), and others. 

The chief modern works treating of this period generally, are — 

Bunsen, Philosophy of Uni'versal History; 4 vols. 8vo. London, 1854. 
Learned, but wild and extravagant, more especially in its chronology. 

Rawlinson, G., Fi-ve Great Monarchies, Sec. (see p. 6), vols. i. to iii. 

The subject is also discussed generally by B. G. Niebuhr, in the iirst volume 
of his Fortrdge uber alte Geschichte (see p. 5), and by Mr. P. SMITH in the 
first volume of his Ancient History (see p. 6). 

Among the works which treat of portions of the time, the following are of 
value : — 

Geschichte Assurs und Babels seit Phul, by M. NiEBUHR. Berlin, 1857. 

Rerum Assyriarum lempora Emendata, by Brandis. Bonnse, 1853. 

Prophecies relating to Nineveh, by G. Vance SMITH. London, 1857. 

Some other modern writers will be named under the heads of particular 
nations. 

I. CHALDEAN MONARCHY. 

I. The earliest of the Asiatic monarchies sprang up in the 
alluvial plain at the head of the Persian Gulf. Here Moses places 
the first 'kingdom' (Gen. x. 10); and here Berosus 
regarded a Chaldean monarchy as established pro- ^ ^^ ^^^^ ^' 
bably as early as b.c. 3000. The Hebrew records give Nimrod 



26 ANCIENT HISTORY. [book i. 

as the founder of this kingdom, and exhibit Chedorlaomer as lord- 
paramount in the region not very long afterwards. The names of 
the kings in the lists of Berosus are lost j but we are told that 
he mentioned by name forty-nine Chaldsean monarchs, whose 
reigns covered a space of 458 years from about B.C. 2000 to about 
B.C. 1543. The primeval monuments of the country have yielded 
memorials of fifteen or sixteen kings, who probably belonged to 
this early period. They were at any rate the builders of the most 
ancient edifices now existing in the country; and their date is 
long anterior to the time of Sennacherib and Nebuchadnezzar. 
The phonetic reading of these monumental names is too uncertain 
to justify their insertion here. It will be sufficient to give, from 
Berosus, an outline of the dynasties which ruled in Chaldsea, from 
about B.C. 3000 to 747, the era of Nabonassar : — 

Chaldaean dynasty, ruling for 458 years . . . about B.C. 2001 to 1543. 

(Kings : Nimrod, Chedorlaomer.) 
Arabian dynasty, ruling for 245 years . . . '. about B.C. 1543 to 1298. 
Dynasty of forty-five kings, ruling for 526 years about B.C. 1298 to 772. 
Reign of Pul (say 25 years) about B.C. 772 to 747. 

3. Berosus, it will be observed, marks during this period two, 

if not three, changes of dynasty. After the Chaldaeans have borne 

. sway for 458 years, they are succeeded by Arabs, 

dynasty and who hold the dominion for 345 years, when they too 
condition. ^^.^ superseded by a race, not named, but probably 
Assyrian (see p. 28). This race bears rule for 536 years, and then 
Pul ascends the throne, and reigns for a term of years not stated. 
(Pul is called "^king of Assyria' in Scripture; but this may be, 
an inexactness. He is not to be found among the Assyrian monu- 
mental kings.) These changes of dynasty mark changes of con- 
dition. Under the first or Chaldsean dynasty, and under the last 
monarch, Pul, the country was flourishing and free. The second 
dynasty was probably, and the third certainly, established by con- 
quest. Chaldaea, during the ^%6 years of the third dynasty, was of 
secondary importance to Assyria, and though from time to time 
engaged in wars with the dominant power of Western Asia, was 
in the main submissive and even subject. The names of six 
kings belonging to this dynasty have been recovered from the 
Assyrian monuments. Among them is a Nebuchadnezzar, while 
the majority commence with the name of the god Merodach. 

3. The Chaldsean monarchy had from the first an architectural 



PART I.] ASIATIC NATIONS. 27 

character. Babylon, Erech or Orchoe, Accad, and Calneh, were 
founded by Nimrod. Ur was from an early date „, 

■' •' Characler 

a city of importance. The attempt to build a tower of the 
'which should reach to heaven/ made here (Gen. xi. "^onarciy. 
4), was in accordance with the general spirit of the Chaldsean 
people. Out of such simple and rude materials as brick and 
bitumen vast edifices were constructed, pyramidical in design, but 
built in steps or stages of considerable altitude. Other arts also 
flourished. Letters were in use; and the baked bricks employed 
by the royal builders had commonly a legend in their centre. 
Gems were cut, polished^ and engraved with representations of 
human forms, portrayed with spirit. Metals of many kinds were 
worked, and fashioned into arms, ornaments, and implements. 
Textile fabrics of a delicate tissue were manufactured. Commerce 
was carried on with the neighbouring nations both by land and 
sea : the ^ ships of Ur"" visiting the shores of the Persian Gulf, and 
perhaps those of the ocean beyond it. The study of Astronomy 
commenced, and observations of the heavenly bodies were made, 
and carefully recorded. 

According to Simplicius, these observations reached back a period of 1903 
years when Alexander entered Babylon. This would make them commence 
B.C. 2234. 

II. ASSYEIAN MONARCHY. 

TERIODS. B.C. 

I. Previous to the Conquest of Babylon, Mrhich occurred about .... 1250 

II. From the conquest of Babylon to the accession of Tiglath-Pileser II. . 745 

III. .From the accession of Tiglath-Pileser to the fall of Nineveh .... 625 

I. The traces which we possess of the First Period are chiefly 
monumental. The Assyrian inscriptions furnish two lists — one 
of three, and the other of four consecutive kings — ^. ^ . , 

' ° rirst penod, 

which belong probably to this early time. The seat prior to 
of empire is at first Asshur (now Kileh Sherghat), ^'^^ ^^^^' 
on the right bank of the Tigris, about sixty miles below Nineveh. 
Some of the kings are connected by intermarriage with the Chal- 
daean monarchs of the period, and take part in the struggles of 
pretenders to the Chaldaean crown. One of them, Shalmaneser I, 
wars in the mountain-chain of Niphates, and plants cities in 
that region (about B.C. 1270). This monarch also builds Calah 
(Nimrud), forty miles north of Asshur, on the left or east bank 
of the river. 



28' ANCIENT HISTORY. [book i. 

Art of this period, rude. Letters, scanty. Cities quadrangular, and sur- 
rounded by walls. Palaces are placed on a lofty mound. Temple-towers 
pyramidical. 

3. The Second Period is evidently that of which Herodotus 

spoke as lasting for 530 years^ from about b. c. 1360 to 740. It 

Second commenced with the conquest of Babylon by Tig- 

^B^c"^' lathi-Nin (probably the original of the Greek 

1250-745. f Ninus')_, and it terminated with the new dynasty 

established by Tiglath-Pileser II. The monuments furnish for 

the earlier portion of this period some nine or ten discontinuous 

royal names^ while for the later portion they supply a complete 

consecutive list^ and an exact chronology. The exact chronology 

begins with the year B.C. 909. 

Note, that the lists of Ctesias, which should belong to this period, differ 
completely from those of the monuments ; that they are internally impro- 
bable, as they consist in part of Medo-Persian, in part of Greek, in part of 
geographic names ; and that consequently they must be set aside as wholly 
unhistorical. 

3. The great king of the earlier portion of the Second Period is 
a certain Tiglath-Pileser, who has left a long historical inscription, 

Subdivision which shows that he carried his arms deep into 
°^^^^P^™'^' Mount Zagros on the one hand, and as far as 

1250-909. Northern Syria on the other. He likewise made 
an expedition into Babylonia. Date, about B.C. 11 30. His son 
was also a warlike prince; but from about b. c. 11 00 to 900 
Assyrian history is still almost a blank ; and it is probable that 
we have here a period of depression. 

4. For the later portion of the Second Period — from b.c. 909 
to 745 — the chronology is exact, and the materials for history 

B.C. are abundant. In this period Calah became the 

909-745. capital, and several of the palaces and temples were 
erected which have been disinterred at Nimrud. The Assyrian 
monarchs carried their arms beyond Zagros, and came into con- 
tact with Medes and Persians ; they deeply penetrated Armenia ; 
and they pressed from Northern into Southern Syria, and imposed 
their yoke upon the Phoenicians, the kingdom of Damascus, and 
the kingdom of Israel. The names of Benhadad, Hazael, Ahab, 
and Jehu are common to the Assyrian and Hebrew records. 
Towards the close of the period, the kings became slothful and 
unwarlike, military expeditions ceased, or were conducted only to 
short distances and against insignificant enemies. 



PAETi.] ASIATIC NATIONS. 29 

Line of Kings : — Asshur-danin-il I. Reign ended, B.C. 909. Successor, his 
son, Hu-likh-khus III (Iva-lush). Reigned from B.C. 909 to 889. Successor, 
his son, Tiglathi-Nin II. Reigned from B.C. 889 to 886. Warred in Ni- 
phates. Asshur-idanni-pal I (Sardanapalus), his son, succeeded. A great con- 
queror. Warred in Zagros, Armenia, Western Mesopotamia, Syria, and 
Babylonia. Received the submission of the chief Phoenician towns. Built 
a great palace at Calah. Reigned from B.C. 886 to 858. Followed on the 
throne by his son, Shalmaneser II, who reigned from B.C. 858 to 823, and was 
contemporary with Benhadad and Hazael of Damascus, and with Ahab and 
Jehu in Israel. Built a palace and set up an obelisk at Calah. Warred in the 
same countries as his fathei', and likewise in the highland beyond Zagros, 
where he contended with the INIedes and Persians ; also in Lower Syria, where 
he was engaged against Benhadad, Hazael, and Ahab, and received tribute 
from Jehu. , Succeeded on the throne by his son, Shamas-Iva or Samsi-Hu, 
who reigned from B.C. 823 to 810. This king had wars with the Medes, 
Persians, Armenians, and Babylonians. His successor was his son, Hu-likh- 
khus IV (Iva-lush), who mounted the throne B.C. 810 and reigned till B.C. 781. 
He too was a warlike monarch. He took Damascus, and received tribute 
from Samaria, Philistia, and Edom Babylonia acknowledged his sovereignty. 
His wife bore the name of Sammuramit (Semiramis). The next king was 
Shalmaneser III, who reigned from B.C. 781 to 771. His wars were with 
Eastern Armenia and the Syrians of Damascus and Hadrach. He was suc- 
ceeded by Asshur-danin-il II, a comparatively unwarlike prince, under whom 
military expeditions became infrequent. In the ninth year of this king's 
reign an eclipse of the sun is recorded as having taken place iu the month 
Sivan (June) — undoubtedly the eclipse of June 15 of that year, which was 
visible over the whole of Western Asia. Asshur-danin-il reigned from B.C. 
771 to 753. He was succeeded by the last monarch of this series, Asshur- 
likh-khus, or Asshur-lush, who reigned ingloriously for eight years — from B.C. 
753 to 745. 

5. The Assyrian art of the Second shows a great advance 
upon that of the First Period. Magnificent palaces were built, 
richly embellished with bas-reliefs. Sculpture was Art, ac. of 
rigid, but bold and grand. Literature was more *i^ period, 
cultivated. The history of each reign was written by con- 
temporary annalists_, and cut on stone, or impressed on cylinders 
of baked clay. Engraved stel^ were erected in all the countries 
under Assyrian rule. Considerable communication took place 
with foreign countries; and Bactrian camels, baboons, curious 
antelopes, elephants, and rhinoceroses were imported into Assyria 
from the East. 

The art of this period is largely illustrated in the Monuments of Nineveh, 
First Series. By A. H. Layard; folio. London, 1849. 

6. In the Third Period the Assyrian Empire reached the height 
of its greatness under the dynasty of the Sargonidae, after which 
it fell suddenly, owing to blows received from two , . 
powerful foes. The period commenced with a re- b.c. 
vival of the military spirit and vigour of the nation 

under Tiglath-Pileser II, the king of that name mentioned in 



30 ANCIENT HISTORY. [book i. 

Scripture. Distant expeditions were resumed, and the arms of 
Assyria carried into new regions. Egypt was attacked and re- 
duced ; Susiana was subjugated ^ and in Asia Minor Taurus 
was crossed, Gappadocia invaded, and relations established with 
the Lydian monarch, Gyges. Naval expeditions were undertaken 
both in the Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf. Gyprus sub- 
mitted, and the Assyrian monarchs numbered Greeks among 
their subjects. Almost all the kings of the period came into 
contact with the Jews, and the names of most of them appear 
in the Hebrew records. Towards the close of the period the 
empire sustained a severe shock from the sudden invasion of 
vast hordes of Scythians from the North. Before it could recover 
from the prostration caused by this attack, its old enemy, Media, 
fell upon it, and, assisted by Babylon, effected its destruction. 

Line of Kings of the Third Period : — 1. Tiglath-Pileser II, an usurper, 
ascends the throne B.C. 745, two years after Nabonassar in Babylon. Wars 
in Babylonia, Media, Armenia, Southern Syria, and Palestine. Receives 
tribute from Menahem, about B.C. 743. Takes Damascus, attacks Pekah 
of Israel, and accepts the submission of Ahaz of Judah, about B.C. 734 
to 732. 2. Shalmaneser IV ; his first year B.C. 727. Leads several expe- 
ditions into Palestine. Conquers Phoenicia, except the island Tyre, which 
he attacks by sea: his fleet suffers a defeat. In B.C. 723 commences 
the siege of Samaria. Loses his crown by a revolution after reigning 
six years. 3. Sargon, an usurper; ascends the throne B.C. 721. Takes 
Samaria and settles the Israelites in Gauzanitis and Media. Successful war 
with Shebek I (Sabaco) of Egypt for the possession of Philistia. Defeat and 
capture of Merodach-Baladan in Babylonia, B.C. 709. Submission of Cyprus, 
B.C. 708 to 707. Invasion of Susiana. Conquest of Media. Wars in Niphates 
and Taurus. 4. Sennacherib, son of .Sargon, succeeds, B.C. 705. Expedition 
against Babylon, B.C. 702. Deposes Merodach-Baladan and sets up Belibus. 
First expedition into Palestine, B.C. 700. Submission of Elulseus of Sidon, 
and Hezekiah of Judah. Second expedition into Babylonia, B.C. 699. Belibus 
deposed, and Assaranadius or Asordanes, son of Sennacherib, made king. 
Second expedition into Palestine, about B.C. 698. Great destruction of the 
Assyrian army near Pelusium, on the borders of Egypt. War with Susiana ; a 
fleet launched on Persian Gulf, about B.C. 692 to 690. Conquest of Cilicia and 
founding of Tarsus, about B. c. 685. Murder of Sennacherib by two of his sons, 
B.C. 680. 5. Esarhaddon, son of Sennacherib, obtains the crown after a short 
struggle. Reigns alternately at Babylon and Nineveh. Puts down revolts in 
Syria and Cihcia, about B.C. 680 to 677. Conquers Edom, about B.C. 674. In- 
vades Central Arabia, B.C. 673. Reduces Northern Media, B.C. 671. Great ex- 
pedition into Egypt, about B.C. 670. Defeat of Tirhakah (Taracus). Egypt 
broken up into a number of petty kingdoms. Revolt and reduction of 
Manasseh, king of Judah. Colonisation of Samaria with Babylonians, Su- 
sianians, and Persians. 6. Asshur-bani-pal (Sardanapalus), son of Esarhaddon, 
succeeds, about B.C. 667, or a little later. Under him Assyria reaches the cul- 
minating point of her greatness. He re-conquered Egypt, which had been 
recovered by Tirhakah ; invaded Asia Minor, and received tribute from 
Gyges, king of Lydia ; subjugated most of Armenia ; completely conquered 
Susiana and attached it as a province to Babylonia ; and reduced many out- 
lying tribes of Arabs. He built the most magnificent of all the Assyrian 



PARTI.] ASIATIC NATIONS. 31 

palaces ; loved music and the arts ; and established a sort of Royal Library at 
Nineveh. His last year is uncertain; but was probably «^om^ B.C. 647. 7. Asshur- 
emid-ilin (the Saracus of Abydenus), son of Asshur-bani-pal, succeeded. 
But little is known of his reign ; its two great events were the inroad of a 
vast Scythic horde from the tract north of the Caucasus, and the Median war 
which brought about the destruction of the empire. First attack of the 
Medes, B.C. 634, repulsed. Scythian inroad, B.C. 632. Second Median at- 
tack, B.C. 627. Defection of the Babylonians under Nabopolassar. Siege of 
Nineveh. Capture, B.C. 625. 

7. Assyrian art attained to its greatest perfection during this 
last period. Palaces were built by Tiglath-Pileser II at Calah, by 
Sargon at Dur Sargina (Khorsabad), by Sennacherib ^^^ ^^ ^^ 
at Nineveh, by Esarhaddon at Calah and Nineveh, the third 
by Sardanapalus II at Nineveh, and by Saracus at ^^^^° 
Calah. Glyptic art advanced, especially under Sardanapalus, when 
the animal forms were executed with a naturalness and a spirit 
worthy of the Greeks. At the same time carving in ivory, metal- 
lurgy, modelling, and other similar arts made much progress. An 
active commerce united Assyria with Phoenicia, Egypt, and Greece. 
Learning of various kinds — astronomic, geographic, linguistic, 
historical — was pursued j and stores were accumulated which will 
long exercise the ingenuity of the moderns. 

The best illustrations of Assyrian art during this period will be found in 
the Monument de Nini've of MoNS. BoTTA (Paris, 1849-50), 5 vols, folio ; and 
in Mr. La yard's Monuments of Nineveh, Second Series (London, 1853). On 
Assyrian architecture, consult Ihe Palaces of Nine'veh and Persepolis Restored, by 
Mr. James Fergusson (London, 1851); and the Assyrian section in his 
History of Architecture, vol. i. (London, 1866). 

III. MEDIAN MONARCHY. 

PERIODS. "• C- 

I. Media Independent 830-710 

II. Media subject to Assyria 710-650 

I. The primitive history of the Medes is enveloped in great 
obscurity. The mention of them as Madai in Genesis (x. 3), 
and the statement of Berosus that they furnished an Early 
early dynasty to Babylon, imply their importance in history, 
very ancient times. But scarcely anything is hiown of them till 
the ninth century B.C., when they were attacked in their own proper 
country. Media Magna, by the Assyrians (about B.C. 830). At 
this time they were under the government of numerous petty chief- 
tains, and offered but a weak resistance to the arms of the Assy- 
rian monarchs. No part of their country, however, was reduced to 
subjection until the time of Sargon, who conquered some Median 
territory about b.c. 710, and planted it with cities in which he 



32 ANCIENT HISTORY. [book i. 

placed his Israelite captives. The subsequent Assyrian monarchs 
made further conquests ; and it is evident from their records that 
no great Median monarchy had arisen down to the middle of the 
seventh century b. c. 

The earlier portions of the Zendavesta indicate the existence of powerful 
Arian states on the great plateau of Iran and in the low districts east of the 
Caspian at a very remote period; but they contain no mention at all of 
the Medes. Bactria seems to have been the seat of Arian power in these 
primitive times. 

2. The earliest date which, with our present knowledge, we 
can assign for the commencement of a great Median monarchy 

History is B.C. 650. The monarchs assigned by Herodotus 
^H^^'^d^f *° ^^*^ Ctesias to a time anterior to this may conceiv- 
and Ctesias. ably have been chiefs of petty Median tribes, but 
were certainly not the heads of the whole nation. The probability 
is that they are fictitious personages. Suspicion attaches especially 
to the list of Ctesias, which appears to have been formed by an 
intentional duplication of the regnal and other periods mentioned 
by Herodotus. 

{a) Median History of Herodotus.— The Medes revolt from Assyria, about 
B.C. 740. Conquer their independence and continue for a number of 
years without a monarch. Deioces chosen king, B.C. 708. Reigns fifty-three 
years. Founds Ecbatana, and introduces a rigid court ceremonial. Dies 
B.C. 655. Phraortes, his son, succeeds. Reigns twenty-two years. Con- 
quers Persia. Attacks Assyria. Killed while besieging Nineveh, B.C. 633. 
Cyaxares, his son, reigns from B.C. 633 to 593, forty years. Reorganises the 
army. Renews the attack on Assyria. War interrupted by irruption of 
the Scyths. Takes Nineveh. Wars with Alyattes, king of Lydia, B.C. 615 
to 610. Dies B.C. 593. Astyages, his son, reigns thirty-five years, from 
B.C. 593 to 558, when he is dethroned by his grandson, Cyrus. 

(b) Median History of Ctesias. — The Medes, having revolted from Assyria, 
take and destroy Nineveh, in conjunction with the Babylonians, B.C. 875. 
Arbaces ascends the throne. Reigns twenty-eight years, B. c. 875 to 847. 
Maudaces reigns fifty years, B. c. 847 to 797. Sosarmus, thirty years, B. c. 797 
to 767. Astycas, fifty years, B.C. 767 to 717. Arbianes, twenty-two years, 
B.C. 717 to 695. Artseus, forty years, B.C. 695 to 655. Artynes, twenty-two 
years, B.C. 655 to 633. Astibaras, forty years, B.C. 633 to 593. Astyages, x 
years, the last king. (Note the prevalence of round numbers, the repetition 
of every number but one, and the fact that of the eight numbers six are 
evidently taken from Herodotus.) 

3. There is reason to believe that about b.c. 650, or a little 
later, the Medes of Media Magna were largely reinforced by fresh 

Real history immigrants from the East, and that shortly after- 

B c^ wards they were enabled to take an aggressive atti- 

650-593. tude towards Assyria, such as had previously been 

quite beyond their power. In b. c. 6;^^ — according to Herodotus 



PARTI.] ASIATIC NATIONS. 33 

— they attacked Nineveh, but were completely defeated, their 
leader, whom he calls Phraortes, being slain in the battle. Soon 
after this occurred the Scythian inroad, which threw the Medes 
upon the defensive, and hindered them from resuming their 
schemes of conquest for several years. But, when this danger 
had passed, they once more invaded the Assyrian Empire in force. 
Nineveh was invested and fell. Media upon this became the 
leading power of Western Asia, but was not the sole power, since 
the spoils of Assyria were divided between her and Babylon. 

Historical Kings :— 1. Phraortes (name doubtful). Conquers Persia. At- 
tacks Nineveh. Falls there, B.C. 633. 2. Cyaxares, his son, the great 
Median monarch. Attacks Nineveh, B.C. 632. Called off to resist the 
Scyths. Second attack on Nineveh succeeds, B.C. 625. Conquers all Asia 
betAveen the Caspian and the Halys. Invades Asia Minor and wars against 
Alyattes, B.C. 615 to 610. Dies, B.C. 593. 3. Astyages, his son, ascends the 
throne. His peaceful reign. Media allied with Lydia and Babylon. Revolt 
of the Persians under Cyrus brings the Median Empire to an end, B.C. 558. 
Media long remains the first and most important of the Persian provinces. 

4. Less is known of Median art and civilisation than of As- 
syrian, Babylonian^ or Persian. Their architecture appears to 
have possessed a barbaric magnificence, but not 
much of either grandeur or beauty. The great character of 

palace at Ecbatana was of wood, plated with gold .^^f*^^^." 
^ 1 civilisation. 

and silver. After the conquest of Nineveh, luxu- 
rious habits were adopted from the Assyrians, and the court 
of Astyages was probably as splendid as that of Esarhaddon and 
Sardanapalus. The chief known peculiarity of the Median king- 
dom was the ascendancy exercised in it by the Magi — a priestly 
caste claiming supernatural powers, which had, apparently, been 
adopted into the nation. 

IV. BABYLONIAN MONARCHY. 

PERIODS. B.C. 

I. From the era of Nabonassar to the destruction of Nineveh . . . 747-625 
II. From the destruction of Nineveh and establishment of Babylonian 
independence under Nabopolassar to the conquest of Babylon 
by Cyrus 625-538 

I. After the conquest of Babylonia by the Assyrians, about B.C. 
1250, an Assyrian dynasty was established at Babylon, and the 
country was, in general, content to hold a secondary ^.^^^ period 
position in Western Asia, acknowledging the suzer- b.c. 

747-625 

ainty of the Ninevite kings. From time to time 

efforts were made to shake off the yoke, but without much success 

D 



34 ASIATIC NATIONS. [book i. 

till the accession of Nabonassar, b. c. 747. Under Nabonassar 
and several of his successors Babylonia appears to have been 
independent; and this condition of independence continued, with 
intervals of subjection, down to the accession of Esarhaddon, 
B.C. 680^ when Assyrian supremacy was once more established. 
Babylon then continued in a subject position, till the time when 
Nabopolassar made alliance with Cyaxares, joined in the last siege 
of Nineveh, and, when Nineveh fell^ became independent, b.c. 61^. 

Line of Kings during this Period (Chief authority, the famous Canon 
of Ptolemy): — 1. Nabonassar, Reigned fourteen years, B.C. 747 to 733. 
Destroyed the records of the monarchs who had preceded him. 2. Nadius, 
reigned two years, B.c.733to73i. 3. Chinzinus and Porus, reigned five years, 
B. c. 731 to 726. 4. Eluleeus, reigned five years, B c. 726 to 721. 5. Merodach- 
Baladan, reigned twelve years, B.C. 721 to 709. Embassy to Hezekiah, about 
B.C. 713. Conquered and made prisoner by Sargon. 6. Arceanus, an 
Assyrian viceroy, placed on the throne by Sargon, reigned five years, B.C. 709 
to 704. After an interregnum of more than a year, Merodach-Baladan, who 
had escaped from captivity, recovered the throne, and reigned six months, 
when he was driven out by Sennacherib, who placed on the throne a viceroy, 
7. Belibus ; he reigned from B.C. 702 to 699, 'Suspected of treason by Senna- 
cherib and deprived of his government, 8. Assaranadius, a son of Sennacherib, 
succeeds. He reigns six years, B. c. 699 to 693. Babylon twice revolts and is 
reduced. 9. Regibelus (probably an Assyrian viceroy) reigns a year, B. c. 693 
to 692. 10, Mesesimordachus (also probably a viceroy) reigns four years, 
B.C. 692 to 688. A period of anarchy and disturbance follows, coinciding 
with the last eight years of Sennacherib. No king reigns so long as a year. 
11, Esarhaddon conquers Babylon, takes the title of king, builds himself a palace 
there, and reigns alternately at Babylon and Nineveh. He holds the throne 
for thirteen years, B. c. 680 to 667. 12. Saos-duchinus, son of Esarhaddon, 
is made viceroy by his father or brother, and governs Babylon for twenty 
years, from B. c. 667 to 647. 13. Cinneladanus (either an Assyrian viceroy, or 
the last Assyrian monarch himself) succeeds Saos-duchinus, and holds the 
throne for twenty-two years, from B. c, 647 to 625. 

3. During the Second Period, Babylonia was not only an inde- 
pendent kingdom, but was at the head of an empire. Nabopo- 
Second period, l^ssar and Cyaxarcs divided the Assyrian dominions 
Babylonian between them, the former obtaining for -his share 
B.C. ' Susiana, the Euphrates valley, Syria^ Phoenicia, and 
625-538. Palestine. A brilliant period followed'. At first 
indeed the new empire was threatened by Egypt; and for a few 
years the western provinces were actually held in subjection by 
Pharaoh - Nechoh ; but Babylon now aroused herself, defeated 
Nechoh, recovered her territory, and carrying her arms through 
Palestine into Egypt, chastised the aggressor on his own soil. 
From this time till the invasion of Cyrus the empire continued 
to flourish, but became gradually less and less warlike, and offered 
a poor resistance to the Persians. 



PART I.] BABYLONIA. 36 

Line of Kings : — 1. Nabopolassar. Becomes independent on the fall of 
Nineveh, B.C. 625. Assists Cyaxares in his Lydian war, B.C. 615 to 610, and 
brings about the peace which ends it. Loses the western provinces to Nechoh 
of Egypt, B. c. 60S. Sends Nebuchadnezzar to recover them, B. c. 605. Dies, 
B. c. 604. 2. Nebuchadnezzar, his son, returns victorious from Syria, and is 
acknowledged as king. Wars in Phoenicia, Palestine, and Egypt. Takes and 
destroys Jerusalem, B.C. 586. Takes Tyre, B.C. 585. Recognised as lord- 
paramount of Egypt, about B. c. 569. Period of the construction of great 
works, B.C. 585 to 570. Madness — recovery. Death, B.C. 561. 3. Evil-Mero- 
dach, his son, succeeds. Reigns only two years. Murdered by his brother- 
in-law, 4. Neriglissar (or Nergal-shar-uzur), who succeeds, B.C. 559 (his 
wife perhaps the Nitocris of Herodotus). Builds the western palace at 
Babylon. Dies after a reign of four years, B.C. 555. 5. Laborosoarchod, 
or Labossoracus, his son, a mere boy, mounts the throne. He is murdered 
after a few months by 6. Nabonadius (Labynetus), the last king. Not 
being of royal birth, he married a daughter of Nebuchadnezzar (probably 
Neriglissar's widow), and as soon as his son by this inarriage, Belshazzar 
(Bel-shar-uzur), is of sufficient age, associates him on the throne. Makes 
alliance with Croesus of Lydia, B.C. 555. Constructs the river defences at 
Babylon. Attacked by Cyrus and defeated — throws himself into Borsippa. 
Babylon, carelessly defended by Belshazzar, is taken by stratagem. Nabona- 
dius surrenders himself a prisoner, B. c. 538. 

3. The architectural works of the Babylonians, more especially 
under Nebuchadnezzar, were of surpassing grandeur. The ' hanging 
gardens' of that prince, and the walls with which 

Characteristics 

he surrounded Babylon, were reckoned among the of t^g empire. 
Seven Wonders of the World. The materials used Architecture, 

art, &c. 

were the same as in the early Chaldean times, 
sunburnt and baked brick j but the baked now preponderated. 
The ornamentation of buildings was by bricks of different hues, 
or sometimes by a plating of precious metal, or by enamelling. 
By means of the last-named process, war-scenes and hunting- 
scenes were represented on the walls of palaces, which are said 
to have been life-like and spirited. Temple-towers were still 
built in stages, which now sometimes reached the number of 
seven. Useful works of great magnitude were also constructed 
by some of the kings, especially by Nebuchadnezzar and Nabo- 
nadius; such as canals, reservoirs, embankments, sluices, and 
piers on the shores of the Persian Gulf. Commerce flourished, 
and Babylon was reckoned emphatically a 'city of merchants.' 
The study of astronomy was also pursued with zeal and industry. 
Observations were made and carefully recorded. The sky was 
mapped out into constellations, and the fixed stars were cata- 
logued. Occupations of the planets by the sun and moon were 
noted. Time was accurately measured by means of sun-dials, 
and other astronomical instruments were probably invented. At 

D 3 



36 ASIATIC NATIONS. [book i. 

the same time it must be confessed that the astronomical science 
of the Babylonians was not pure, but was largely mixed with 
astrology, more especially in the later times. 

On the commerce of the Babylonians, see the section upon the subject in 
Heeren's Historical Researches, ' Asiatic Nations,' vol. ii. On their astronomy, 
see Sir G. C. Lewis's Astronomy of the Ancients, ch. v., and G. Rawlinson,- 
Five Monarchies, ' Babylonia,' ch. v. For illustrations of Babylonian art 
(mixed, however, with Assyrian and Persian), see Cullimore, Oriental 
Cylinders, London, 1842, 8vo, ; and F. Lajard, Culte de Mithra, Paris, 1847, 
folio. 



V. KINGDOMS IN ASIA MINOR. 

1. The geographical formation of Asia Minor, which separates 

it into a number of distinct and isolated regions, was probably 

the main reason why it did not in early times be- 
No empire in ,, ^ r , • rr>, ,., 
Asia Minor come the Seat of- a great empire. The near equality 

in the of strength that existed among several of the races 

early times. ° , ° 

by which it was inhabited — as the Phrygians, the 
Lydians, the Carians, the Cilicians, the Paphlagonians, and the 
Cappadocians — would tend naturally in the same direction, and 
lead to the formation of several parallel kingdoms instead of a 
single and all-embracing one. Nevertheless, ultimately, such 
a great kingdom did grow up ; but it had only just been formed 
when it was subverted by one more powerful. 

2. The most powerful state in the early times seems to have 
been Phrygia. It had an extensive and fertile territory, especially 

Kingdom of Suited for pasturage, and was also rich in the pos- 
Phrygia. session of Salt lakes, which largely furnished that 
necessary of life. The people were brave, but somewhat brutal. 
They had a lively and martial music. It is probable that they 
were at no time all united into a single community; but there 
is no reason to doubt that a considerable monarchy grew up in 
the north-western portion of the country, about e.g. 750 or earlier. 
The capital of the kingdom was Gordiseum on the Sangarius. The 
monarchs bore alternately the two names of Gordias and Midas. 
As many as four of each name have been distinguished by some 
critics; but the dates of the reigns are uncertain. A Midas 
appears to have been contemporary with Alyattes (about B.C. 
600 to 570), and a Gordias with Croesus (b. c. 570 to 560). 
Phrygia was conquered and became a province of Lydia about 
B.C. 560. 



PART I.] LYDIA. 37 

3. Cilicia was likewise the seat of a monarchy in times anterior 
to Cyrus. About B.C. 711 Sargon gave the country to Ambris, 
king of Tubal^ as a dowry with his daughter. Sen- Kingdom of 
nacherib, about b.c. 701^ and Esarhaddon, about B.C. Cilicia. 
677, invaded and ravaged the region. Tarsus was founded by 
Sennacherib, about b.c. 685. In b.c. 666 Sardanapalus took to 
wife a Cilician princess. Fifty years afterwards we find a 
Syennesis seated on the throne, and from this time all the kings 
appear to have borne that name or title. Cilicia maintained 
her independence against Croesus, and (probably) against Cyrus, 
but submitted to Persia soon afterwards, probably in the reign 
of Cambyses. 

4. Ultimately the most important of all the kingdoms ©f Asia 
Minor was Lydia. According to the accounts which Herodotus 
followed, a Lydian kingdom had existed from very , • ,. 
ancient times_, monarchs to whom he gives the name kingdom and 
of Manes^ Atys, Lydus^ and Meles having borne empue. 
sway in Lydia prior to b.c. 1229. This dynasty, which has 
been called Atyadae, was followed by one of Heraclidae, which 
continued in power for 505 years — from b.c. J229 to 724. (The 
last six kings of this dynasty are known from Nicholas of 
Damascus who follows Xanthus, the native writer. They were 
Adyattes 1^ Ardys^ Adyattes 11^ Meles Myrsus, and Sadyattes or 
Candaules.) On the murder of Candaules, b.c. 724, a third 
dynasty — that of the Mermnadse — bore rule. This continued 
till B.C. 554^ when the last Lydian monarchy Croesus^ was con- 
quered by Cyrus. This monarch had previously succeeded in 
changing his kingdom into an empire^ having extended his 
dominion over all Asia Minor, excepting Lycia, Cilicia, and 
Cappadocia. 

Dynasty of the Mermnadae (according to the chronology of Herodotus) : 
1. Gyges murders Candaules, and mounts the throne, B. c. 724. Reigns thirty- 
eight years. Takes Colophon. Attacks Miletus, Dies, B.C. 686. 2. Ardys, 
his son, succeeds. Takes Priene. Irruption of Cimmerians. Dies, B.C. 637. 
3. Sadyattes, his son, reigns twelve years, from B.C. 637 to 625. Wars with 
Miletus. 4. Alyattes, son of Sadyattes, mounts the throne. Expels the 
Cimmerians. Makes peace with Miletus, B.C. 620. Carries on defensive war 
against Cyaxares of Media, B.C. 615 to 610. Takes Smyrna. Attacks Cla- 
zomense. Dies, B.C. 568. 5. Croesus, his son, succeeds. Reduces the Ionian, 
iEolian, and Dorian Greeks. Conquers all Asia Minor west of the Halys, 
except Lycia and Cihcia. Alarmed at the success of Cyrus, makes alliance 
with Sparta, Egypt, and Babylon, B.C. 555. Invades Cappadocia, and fights 
an indecisive battle at Pteria. Attacked in his turn, defeated, and made 
prisoner by Cyrus, B.C. 554. 



38 ASIATIC NATIONS. [book i. 

Chronology of this dynasty, according to Eusebius :— Gyges, thirty-six 
years, B.C. 698 to 662. Ardys, thirty-eight years, B.C. 662 to 624. Sadyattes, 
fifteen years, B.C. 624 to 609. Alyattes, forty-nine years, B.C. 609 to 560. 
Croesus, fifteen years, B.C. 560 to 546. 



VI. PHCENICIA. 

T. Phoenicia, notwithstanding the small extent of its territory, 

which consisted of a mere strip of land between the crest of 

Lebanon and the sea^ was one of the most im- 

orphoenida. portant countries of the ancient world. In her the 

Its history commercial spirit first showed itself as the dominant 

fragmentaiy. , 

Spirit of a nation. She was the earner between 
the East and the West — the link that bound them together — 
in times anterior to the first appearance of the Greeks as naviga- 
tors. No complete history of Phoenicia has come down to us, nor 
can a continuous history be constructed; but some important 
fragments remain, and the general condition of the country, 
alternating between subjection and independence, is ascertained 
sufficiently. 

The chief sources for Phoenician history are — 1. The fragments of Men'ander 
and Dius preserved to us in Josephus. (Menander and Dius composed 
their histories from native sources.) 2. The sacred writers, Ezekiel, and the 
authors of Kings and Chronicles. 3. Scattered notices in Homer, Hero- 
dotus, and other classical authors. 

The best modern authorities on tlie subject are the following : — 

Movers, Die Phmizier, 3 vols. 8vo. Berlin, 1841-50. A work of great 
research and of a wide grasp, but allowing undue weight to Philo-Byblius 
pretended translation of the Phoenician history of Sanchoniathon. 

Kenrick, J., Pboenicia. London, 1855 ; Svo. The best work on the sub- 
ject. Carries the history down to the conquest of Syria by the Turks, 
A.D. 1516. 

Heeren, Ideen, vol. ii., part i. Peculiarly good with respect to the com- 
merce of the Phoenicians. 

Tvv^iSTLETON, Hon. E. T. B., Articles on Phoenicia and Tyre in Dr. Smith's 
Dictionary of the Bible. London, 1860-3. 

2. At no time did Phcenicia form either a single centralised 
state, or even an organised confederacy. Under ordinary circum- 

Isolation of stanccs the states were separate and independent : 
the cities. only in times of danger did they occasionally unite 

eminence of under the leadership of the most powerful. The 
Sidon. chief cities were Tyre, Sidon, Berytus, Byblus, 
Tripolis, and Aradus. Of these Sidon seems to have been the 
most ancient ; and there is reason to believe that, prior to about 
B.C. 1050, she was the most flourishing of all the Phoenician 
communities. 



PAET I.] PHCENICIA. 39 

3, The priority and precedency enjoyed by Sidon in the remoter 
times devolved upon Tyre (her colony, according to some) about 
B.C. 1050. The defeat of Sidon by the Philistines 

of Ascalon is said to have caused the transfer of 'seded by ' 
power. Tyre, and indeed every Phoenician city, Tyre, about 
was under the rule of kings; but the priestly 
order had considerable influence j and an aristocracy of birth, 
or wealth, likewise restrained any tyrannical inclinations on the 
part of the monarch. The list of the Tyrian kings from about 
B.C. 1050 to 830 is known to us from the fragments of Menander. 

Line of Kings :— 1. Abibaal, partly contemporary with David. 2. Hiram, 
his son, the friend of David and Solomon. Ascended the throne about 
B.C. 1025. Reigned thirty-four years. 3. Baleazar, his son, succeeded, 
about B.C. 991. Reigned seven years. 4. Abdastartus, his son, reigned 
nine years, from about B.C. 984 to 975, when he was murdered by a con- 
spiracy. 5. One of the conspirators — name vmknown — succeeded, and reigned 
twelve years, from about B.C. 975 to 963. The line of Abibaal seems then 
to have been restored. 6. Astartus, reigned also twelve years, from about 
B.C. 963 to 951, when he was succeeded by his brother, 7. Aserymus, who, 
after a reign of nine years, was murdered by another brother, Phales, about 
B.C. 942. 8. Phales reigned eight months only, being in his turn murdered 
by the high-priest of Astarte, Ithobalus or Ethbaal, who seized the throne. 
9. Ithobalus reigned thirty-two years, about B.C. 941 to 909. Ahab married his 
daughter Jezebel. Great drought in his reign. 10. Badezor, his son, suc- 
ceeded. Reigned six years only, from about B.C. 909 to 903. 11. Matgen, 
the son of Badezor and father of Dido, then mounted the throne. His reigti 
lasted thirty-two years, about B.C. 903 to 871. Matgen was followed by his 
son, 12. Pygmalion, under whom occurred the flight of Dido and the coloni- 
sation of Carthage. He reigned forty-seven years, from about B.C. 871 to 824. 

4. The commercial spirit of Phoenicia was largely displayed 
during this period, which, till towards its close, was one of 
absolute independence. The great monarchies of phcenician 
Egypt and Assyria were now, comparatively speak- ^° °^^^" 
ing, weak ; and the states between the Euphrates and the African 
border, being free from external control, were able to pursue 
their natural bent without interference. Her commercial leanings 
early induced Phoenicia to begin the practice of establishing 
colonies; and the advantages which the system was found to 
secure caused it to acquire speedily a vast development. The 
coasts and islands of the Mediterranean were rapidly covered 
with settlements ; the Pillars of Hercules were passed, and cities 
built on the shores of the ocean. At the same time factories were 
established in the Persian Gulf; and, conjointly with the Jews, 
on the Red Sea. Phoenicia had at this time no serious com- 
mercial rival ; and the trade of the world was in her hands. 



40 ASIATIC NATIONS. [book i. 

Geographical sketch of the Phoenician colonies : — («) In the Eastern Medi- 
terranean : Paphos, Amathus, Tamisus, and Ammochosta in Cyprus ; lalysus 
and Camii-us in Rhodes ; Thera, and most of the Cyclades ; Thasos ; Thebes (?). 
(Ji) In the Western Mediterranean : Lilybseum and Panormus (Mahaneth) 
in Sicily ; Gaulos, Melite ; Utica, Carthage, and Hadrumetum in North 
Africa ; Carteia, Malaca in Spain, (c) Beyond the straits : Tartessus on the 
Baetis (Guadalquiver) and Gades (now Cadiz) on an island close to the Spanish 
coast, (d) In the Persian Gulf : Tylos and Aradus (perhaps Bahrein). 

5. The geographical position of the Phoenician colonies marks 
the chief lines of their trade^ but is far from indicating its full 

extent ; since the most distant of these settlements 
its extent' served as starting-points whence voyages were made 

and chief hnes ^q remoter regions. Phoenician merchant-men pro- 
of direction. ° ^ 

ceeding from Gades and Tartessus explored the 
western coast of Africa, and obtained tin from Cornwall and the 
Scilly Islands. The Traders of Tylus and Aradus extended their 
voyages beyond the Persian Gulf to India and Taprobane^ or 
Ceylon. Phoenician navigators, starting from Elath in the ,Red 
Sea, procured gold from Ophir^ on the south-eastern coast of 
Arabia. Thasos and the neighbouring islands furnished con- 
venient stations from which the Euxine could be visited and 
commercial relations established with Thrace^ Scythia^ and 
Colchis: Some have supposed that the North Sea was crossed 
and the Baltic entered in quest of amber; but the balance of 
evidence is on the whole against this extreme hypothesis. 

6. The sea-trade of the Phoenicians was probably supplemented 
from a very remote date by a land traffic ; but this portion of their 

commerce scarcely obtained its full development till 
of the early the time of Nebuchadnezzar. A line of communi- 
P^"° cation must indeed have been established early with 

the Persian Gulf settlements ; and in the time of Solomon there 
was no doubt a route open to Phoenician traders from Tyre or 
Joppa, through Jerusalem, to Elath. But the generally disturbed 
state of Western Asia during the Assyrian period would have 
rendered land traffic then so insecure, that, excepting where it 
was a necessity, it would have been avoided. 

7. Towards the close of the period, whereof the history has 

been sketched above (see par. 3), the military ex- 

PhosTiicis, 

subject to peditions of the Assyrians began to reach Southern . 
Assyria, about Syria, and Phoenician independence seems to have 

B.C. 850. ^ ^ 

been lost. We cannot be sure that the submission 
was continuous; but from the middle of the ninth till past the 



PABTi.] - PHCENICIA. 41 

middle of the eighth century there occur in the contemporary 
monuments of Assyria plain indications of Plioenician subjection, 
while there is no evidence of resistance or revolt. Native sove- 
reigns tributary to Assyria reign in the Phoenician towns and are 
reckoned by the Assyrian monarchs amongst their dependants. 
The country ceases to have a history of its own ; and, with one 
exception, the very names of its rulers have perished. 

8. About B.C. 743 the passive submission of Phoenicia to the 
Assyrian yoke began to be exchanged for an impatience of it, and 
frequent efforts were made, from this date till Nine- „ 

'■ ' Revolts, and 

veh fell, to re-establish Phoenician independence, recovery of 
These efforts for the most part failed- but it is not i'^dependence. 
improbable that finally, amid the troubles under which the Assy- 
rian empire succumbed, success crowned the nation's patriotic 
exertions, and autonomy was recovered. 

Revolts of Phoenicia from Assyria : — 1. Under a Hiram, from Tiglath- 
Pileser II, about B.C. 743. 2. Under Elulseus, from Shalmaneser, B.C. 727. 
Long resistance of New Tyre. 3. Under the same, from Sennacherib, about 
B.C. 704. Expedition of Sennacherib, B.C. 700. Eluleeus flies. Tubal made 
king. 4. Under Abdi-Melkarth, from Esarhaddon, B.C. 680. Crushed im- 
mediately. 5. Under Baal of Tyre and the contemporary king of Aradus, from 
Sardanapalus, about B.C. 667. Likewise crushed without difficulty. 

9. Scarcely, however, had Assyria fallen, when a new enemy 
appeared upon the scene. Nechoh of Egypt, about 

B.C. 608, conquered the whole tract between his E^ptian"^ 
own borders and the Euphrates. Phoenicia sub- dependency, 
mitted or was reduced, and remained for three years 
an Egyptian dependency. 

TO. Nebuchadnezzar, in B.C. 605, after his defeat of Nechoh at 
Carchemish, added Phoenicia to Babylon; and, though Tyre re- 
volted from him eight years later, b.c. 598, and re- 
sisted for thirteen years all his attempts to reduce by Nebudiad- 
her, yet at length she was compelled to submit, and nezzar, 
the Babylonian yoke was firmly fixed on the entire 
Phanician people. It is not quite certain that they did not shake 
it off upon the death of the great Babylonian king ; but, on the 
whole, probability is in favour of their having remained subject 
till the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus, b. c. 538. As usual, the 
internal government of the dependency was left to the conquered 
people, who were ruled at this time either by native kings, or, 
occasionally, by judges. 



42 ASIATIC NATIONS. ■ [book i. 

Line of Kings and Judges at Tyre (from Menander) :— 1. Ithobaal II, 
contemporary with Nebuchadnezzar, about B.C. 597 to 573. Tyre besieged 
by Nebuchadnezzar for thirteen years, 2. Baal. Reigned ten years, B.C. 573 
to 563. 3. Ecnibaal, judge for three months. 4. Chelbes, judge for ten 
months. 5. Abbarus (Abalus), the high-priest, judge for three months. 
6 and 7. Mytgon and Gerastartus, judges for five years, B.C. 562 to 557. 
8. Balator, king. Reigned a year, B.C. 557 to 556. 9. Merbal, king. Reigned 
four years, B.C. 556 to 552. 10. Hirom, king. Reigned twenty years, B.C. 
552 to 532. In this king's fourteenth year, B.C. 538, Gyrus took Babylon, and 
Hirom became independent. 

II. As Greece rose to power, and as Carthage increased in 

importance^ the sea trade of Phoenicia was to a certain extent 

^ ,. ^ checked. The commerce of the Euxine and the 

Decline 01 

the Phcenician vEgean passcd almost wholly into the hands of the 
anrdeveb'p- ^^^^^ Hellenes ; that of the Western Mediterranean 
ment of the and the Atlantic Ocean had to be shared with the 
daughter state. Meanwhile^ however, in conse- 
quence of the more settled condition of Western Asia, first under 
the later Assyrian, and then under the Babylonian monarchs, the 
land trade received a considerable development, {a) A line of 
traffic was established with Armenia and Cappadocia, and Phoe- 
nician manufactures were exchanged for the horses, mules, slaves, 
and brazen or copper utensils of those regions, [k) Another line 
passed by Tadmor, or Palmyra, to Thapsacus, whence it branched 
on the one hand through Upper Mesopotamia to Assyria, on the 
other down the Euphrates valley to Babylon and the Persian Gulf. 
{c) Whether a third line traversed the Arabian peninsula from end 
to end for the sake of the Yerhen spices may be doubted j but, 
at any rate, communication must have been kept up by land with 
the friendly Jerusalem, and with the Red Sea, which was certainly 
frequented by Phoenician fleets. 

13. The Phoenician commerce was chiefly a carrying trade j but 

there were also a few productions of their own in which their 

, traffic was considerable. The most famous of these 

Character of 

Phoenician was the purple dye, which they obtained from two 
commerce, ghell-fish, the buccinum and the murex^ and by the 
use of which they gave a high value to their textile fabrics. 
Another was glass, whereof they claimed the discovery, and which 
they manufactured into various articles of use and ornament. 
They were also skilful in metallurgy; and their bronzes, their 
gold and silver vessels, and other works in metal, had a high 
repute. Altogether, they have a claim to be considered one of the 
most ingenious of the nations of antiquity_, though we must not 



PART 1.] SFRIA. 43 

ascribe to them the invention of letters or the possession of any 
remarkable artistic talent. 



VII. SYRIA. 

I. Syria, prior to its formation into a Persian satrapy, had at 

no time any political unity. During the Assyrian period it was 

divided into at least five principal states, some of r, ■ •,■■■,, 

■^ ^ J Syria divided 

which were mere loose confederacies. The five into several 
states were— I. The northern Hittites. Chief city, P^^ty states. 
Carchemish (probably identical with the later Mabog, now Bam- 
buch) . 3. The Patena, on the lower Orontes. Chief city, Kinalua. 
3. The people of Hamath, in the Coele-Syrian valley, on the upper 
Orontes. Chief city, Hamath (now Hamah). 4. The southern 
Hittites_, in the tract south of Hamath. 5. The Syrians of 
Damascus^ in the Anti-Libanus, and the fertile country between 
that range and the desert. Chief city, Damascus, on the Abana 
(Barada). 

3. Of these states the one which was, if not the most powerful, 
yet at any rate the most generally known, was Syria of Damascus. 
The city itself was as old as the time of Abraham. Kingdom of 
The state, which was powerful enough, about b.c. Damascus. 
1000, to escape absorption into the empire of Solomon, continued 
to enjoy independence down to the time of Tiglath-Pileser II, 
and was a formidable neighbour to the Jewish and Israelite 
monarchs. After the capture by Tiglath-Pileser, about b.c. 732, 
a time of great weakness and depression ensued. One or two 
feeble attempts at revolt were easily crushed^ after which, for 
a while, Damascus wholly disappears from history. 

Line of Damascene Kings : — 1. Hadad, contemporary with David, about 
B.C. 1040. Assists Hadadezar, king of Zobah, against David; is defeated, and 
makes his submission. 2. Rezon, contemporary with Solomon, about B.C. 
1000. Revolts, and establishes independence. 3. Tab-Rimmon, contemporary 
with Abijah, about B.C. 960 to 950. 4. Ben-Hadad I (his son), contemporary 
with Baasha in Israel and Asa in Judah, about B.C. 950 to 920. Wars with 
Baasha and Omri. 5. Ben-Hadad II (his son), contemporary with Ahab, 
about B.C. 900. Wars with Ahab. Murdered by Hazael. 6. Hazael, con- 
temporary with Jehu in Israel and Shalmaneser II in Assyria, about B.C. 850. 

7. Ben-Hadad III (his son), contemporary with Jehoahaz, about B.C. 840. 
Oppresses Israel. Defeated three times by Joash. Kings unknown till 

8. Rezin (about B.C. 745 to 732), who attacks Ahaz of Judah, and is defeated 
and slain by Tiglath-Pileser. 



44 ASIATIC NATIONS. [book i. 

VIII. JUDJEA. 

I . The history of the Jews and Israelites is known to us in com- 
pleter sequence and in greater detail than that of any other people 
of equal antiquity, from the circumstance that there has been pre- 
served to our day so large a portion of their literature. The Jews 
became familiar with writing during their sojourn in -Egypt, if not 
even earlier ; and kept records of the chief events in their national 
life from that time almost uninterruptedly. From the sacred 
character which attached to many of their historical books, peculiar 
care was taken of them ^ and the result is that they have come 
down to us nearly in their original form. Besides this, a large 
body of their ancient poesy is still extant, and thus it becomes 
possible to describe at length not merely the events of their civil 
history, but their manners, customs, and modes of thought. 

Sources of the History : — (^d) Native. 1. The historical books of Joshua, 
Judges, Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles, with the historical parts of Jeremiah 
and Daniel. 2. The prophetical books, except Haggai, Zechariah, and Ma- 
lachi. 3. JosEPHUS, Antiquitates Judaicce ; ed. CoTTA and Gfrorer, Phila- 
delphia, 1864. {h') Foreign. 1. The Fragments of Nicolas of Damascus, in 
the Fragmenta Hist. GrcBc. vol. iii.; ed. C. MiJLLER, Paris. 2. Tacitus, Historic, 
lib. V. Curious, but of little value. 8. Occasional notices in the cuneiform 
inscriptions of Assyria and the hieroglyphics of Egypt. 

Modern works on the subject are numerous and important. The following 
will be found of especial value : — 

MiLMAN, H. H., History of the Jeivs from the Earliest Period doivn to Modern 
limes. London, 1863 ; 3rd edition, revised and extended; 3 vols. 8vo. 

YMKLTi^Geschichte desVolkes Israel. Gottingen, 1851-8. 2ndedit. ;3 vols. 8vo. 

Stanley, A. P.,' Lectures on the History of the Jenvish Church. First Series ; 
London, 1863. Second Series; London, 1865 ; 2 vols. 8vo. 

Lewis, Origenes Hebrcea : the Antiquities of the Hebre^w Republic. London, 
1724 ; 4 vols. 8vo. 

R ELAND, Antiquitates Sacrce "veterum Hebrcoorum bre'viter delineatOR. Traj. 
Bat. 1708. 

EwALD, Die Alterthumer des Volkes Israel. Gottingen, 185 1-9 ; 7 vols. 8vo. 

And the numerous articles on the subject in Dr. W. Smith's Dictionary of 
the Bible. London, 1860-3; 3 vols. 8vo. 

3. The history of the Jewish state commences with the Ex- 
odus, which is variously dated, at b.c. 1652 (Poole), b.c. 1491 
Periods of (Ussher), or B.C. 1320 (Bunsen, Lepsius). The long 
Jewish history, chronology is, on the whole, to be preferred. We 
may conveniently divide the history into three periods. 

PERIODS. B. C. 

I. From the Exodus to the establishment of the monarchy . . . 1650-1095 

II. From the establishment of the monarchy to the separation into 

two kingdoms 1095^975 

III, From the separation of the kingdoms to the captivity under 

Nebuchadnezzar 975-586 



PART I.] JUD^A. 45 

3. During the First Period the Jews regarded themselves as 
under a theocracy j or, in other words, the policy of the nation 
was directed in all difficult crises by a reference Y\x%\. period 
to the Divine will, which there was a recognised fromB.c. 
mode of consulting. The earthly ruler, or rather Time of the 
leader, of the nation did not aspire to the name or judges. 
position of king, but was content to lead the nation in war and 
judge it in peace from a position but a little elevated above that of 
the mass of the people. He obtained his office neither by heredi- 
tary descent nor by election, but was supernaturally designated to 
it by revelation to himself or to another, and exercised it with the 
general consent^ having no means of compelling obedience. When 
once his authority was acknowledged, he retained it during the 
remainder of his life ; but it did not always extend over the whole 
nation. When he died, he was not always succeeded immediately 
by another similar ruler : on the contrary, there was often a con- 
siderable interval during which the nation had either no head, or 
acknowledged subjection to a foreign conqueror. When there was 
no head, the hereditary chiefs of tribes and families seem to have 
exercised jurisdiction and authority over the different districts. 

4. The chronology of this period is exceedingly uncertain_, as is 
evident from the different dates assigned above (par. 2) to the 
Exodus. The Jews had different traditions upon ,^ 

•^ ^ Uncertainty 

the subject; and the chronological notices in their of the 
sacred books were neither complete, nor, apparently, chronology. 
intended for exact statements. The numbers therefore in the sub- 
joined sketch must be regarded as merely approximate. 

Judges, &c., from the Exodus to the establishment of the monarchy : — 
1. Moses, the great lawgiver of the nation. Delivers the people from their 
Egyptian bondage, and conducts them to the borders of Palestine, B.C. 1650 to 
1 6 10. 2. Joshua. Conquers Palestine and divides it among the tribes, B.C. 1604. 
Dies, about B.C. 1595. Interregnum, about thirty years. Servitude under 
Cushan-rishathaim, eight years, about B.C. 1565 to 1557. 3. Othniel. Delivers 
Israel. Reigns forty years, B.C. 1557 to 1517. Interregnum, about five years. 
Servitude under Eglon, king of Moab, eighteen years, B.C. 15 12 to 1494. 4. Ehud. 
Kills Eglon, and delivers Israel. Land has rest eighty years, B.C. 1494 to 1414. 
5. Shamgar. (His reign probably included in the eighty years.) Servitude under 
Jabin, king of Canaan, twenty years, B.C. i4i4to 1394. 6. Deborah. Delivers 
Israel from Jabin. Land has rest forty years, B.C. 1394 to 1354. Servitude 
under Midian, seven years, B.C. 1 354 to 1347. 7. Gideon. Delivers Israel from 
the Midianites. Reigns forty years, B.C. 1347 to 1307. 8. Abimelech, king. 
Reigns three years, B.C. 1307 to 1304. Interregnum, about five years. 9. Tola. 
Reigns twenty-three years, about B.C. 1299 to 1276. 10. Jair. Reigns twenty- 
two years, about B.C. 1276 to 1254. Interregnum, about five years. Servitude 
under Ammon, eighteen years, B.C. 1249 to 1231. 11. Jephthah. Delivers 



46 ASIATIC NATIONS. [book i. 

Israel from the Ammonites. Reigns six years, B.C. 1231 to 1225. 12. Ibzan. 
Reigns seven years, B.C. 1225 to 1218. 13. Elon. Reigns ten years, B. c. 1 2 1 8 to 
1208. 14. Abdon. Reigns eight years, B.C. 1208 to 1200. Interregnum, about 
five years. Servitude under the PhiHstines, forty years, B.C. 1195 to 11 55. 
15. Samson. Reigns in South-West Palestine during twenty years of these 
forty, B.C. 1175 to 1155. 16. Eli, High-Priest and Judge. Reigns forty years, 
B.C. 1 1 55 to 1 1 15. 17. Samuel, the last Judge. Reigns probably about twenty 
years, B.C. 11 15 to 1095. 

5. The Second Period of the Jewish state comprises three reigns 

only — those of Saul, David, and Solomon, Each of these was 

reffarded as having lasted exactly forty years: and 

Second period, ,^ , . .^^. ^, /, ^ ^ ' 

from B. c. thus the entire duration of the single monarchy was 
T?^^^ff "^'^^tTi reckoned at 1 20 years. The progress of the nation 
of the during this brief space is most remarkable. When 
Israelite power, g^^j ascends the throne the condition of the people 
is but little advanced beyond the point which was reached when 
the tribes under Joshua took possession of the Promised Land. 
Pastoral and agricultural occupations still engross the attention of 
the Israelites j simple habits prevail j there is no wealthy class; 
the monarch, like the Judges, has no court_, no palace, no extra- 
ordinary retinue; he is still little more than leader in war^ and 
chief Judge in time of peace. Again, externally, the nation is as 
weak as ever. The Ammonites on the one side^ and the Philis- 
tines on the other, ravage its territory at their pleasure ; and the 
latter people have encroached largely upon the Israelite borders, 
and reduced the Israelites to such a point of depression that they 
have no arms, offensive or defensive, nor even any workers in 
iron. Under Solomon, on the contrary, within a century of this 
time of weakness^ the Israelites have become the paramount race 
in Syria. An empire has been formed which reaches from the 
Euphrates at Thapsacus to the Red Sea and the borders of Egypt. 
Numerous monarchs are tributary to the Great King who reigns 
at Jerusalem ; vast sums in gold and silver flow into the treasury ; 
magnificent edifices are constructed ; trade is established both 
with the East and with the West ; the court of Jerusalem vies 
in splendour with those of Nineveh and Memphis ; luxury has 
invaded the country ; a seraglio on the largest scale has been 
formed ; and the power and greatness of the Prince has become 
oppressive to the bulk of the people. Such a rapid growth was 
necessarily exhaustive of the nation's strength; and the decline 
of the Israelites as a people dates from the division of the 
kingdom. 



PAET I.] JUDJEA. 47 

6. Saul, divinely pointed out to Samuel, is anointed by him, 

and afterwards accepted by the people upon the casting of lots. 

He is remarkable for his comeliness and lofty stature. „ . ,. ,, , 

•' Reign oi Saul. 

In his first year he defeats the Ammonites, who had b.c. 

overrun the land of Gilead. He then makes war on 1095-1055. 
the Philistines, and gains the great victory of Michmash- from 
which time till near the close of his reign the Philistines remain 
upon the defensive. He also attacks the Amalekites, the Moabites, 
the Edomites, and the Syrians of Zobah. In the Amalekite war he 
offends God by disobedience, and thereby forfeits his right to the 
kingdom. Samuel, by divine command, anoints David, who is 
thenceforth an object of jealousy and hatred to the reigning 
monarch, but is protected by Jonathan, his son. Towards the 
close of Saul's reign the Philistines once more assume the offen- 
sive, under Achish, king of Gath, and at Mount Gilboa defeat 
the Israelites under Saul. Saul, and all his sons but one (Ishbo- 
sheth), fall in the battle. 

7. A temporary division of the kingdom follows the death of 
Saul. Ishbosheth, conveyed across the Jordan by Abner, is ac- 
knowledged as ruler in Gilead, and after five years. Temporary 
during which his authority is extended over all the division of 

• 1 T 1 1 • ^ 11 1 T^- r the kingdom, 

tribes except Judah, is formally crowned as King of b.c. 

Israel at Mahanaim. He reigns there two years, 1055-1048. 
when he is murdered. Meanwhile David is made king by his own 
tribe, Judah, and reigns at Hebron. 

8. On the death of Ishbosheth, David became king of the 
whole nation. His fijst act was the capture of Jerusalem, which 
up to this time had remained in the possession of 

,Ti- TT- 1 -1 1-1 Sole reign of 

the J ebusites. Having taken it, he made it the seat David, 
of government, built himself a palace there, and, by ,(,4^'^'o,c 
removing to it the Ark of the Covenant, constituted 
it the national sanctuary. At the same time a court was formed 
at the new capital, a moderate seraglio set up, and a royal state 
affected unknown hitherto in Israel. 

9. A vast aggrandizement of the state by means of foreign 
conquests followed. The Philistines were chastised, Gath taken, 
and the Israelite dominions in this quarter pushed j^is 

as far as Gaza. Moab was invaded, two-thirds of conquests. 
the inhabitants exterminated, and the remainder forced to pay 
an annual tribute to the conqueror. War followed with Ammon, 



48 ASIATIC NATIONS. [book i. 

and with the various Syrian states interposed between the Holy 
Land and the Euphrates. At least three great battles were fought, 
with the result that the entire tract between the Jordan and the 
Euphrates was added to the Israelite territory, A campaign re- 
duced Edom^ and extended the kingdom to the Red Sea. An 
empire was thus formed^ which proved indeed shortlived, but was 
as real while it lasted as those of Assyria or Babylon. 

10. The glories of David's reign were tarnished by two rebel- 
lions. The fatal taint of polygamy, introduced by David into the 

Rebellions of ^^^io^j gave occasion to these calamities, which 
Absolom arose from the mutual jealousies of his sons. First 

and Adonijah. ^bsolom, and then Adonijah, assume the royal title 
in their father's lifetime ; and pay for their treason, the one im- 
mediately, the other ultimately, with their lives. After the second 
rebellion, David secures the succession to Solomon by associating 
him upon the throne. 

11. The reign of Solomon is the culminating point of Jewish 
history. Resistance on the part of the conquered states has, 

with scarcely an exception, now ceased, and the 

SoTcfmon, ^^w king can afford to be ^a man of peace.' The 

^•<^- position of his kingdom among the nations of 

the earth is acknowledged by the neighbouring 
powers, and the reigning Pharaoh does not scruple to give him 
his daughter in marriage. A great commercial movement follows. 
By alliance with Hiram of Tyre, Solomon is admitted to a share 
in the profits of Phoenician traffic, and the vast influx of the 
precious metals into Palestine, which results from this arrange- 
ment, enables the Jewish monarch to indulge freely his taste for 
ostentation and display. The court is reconstructed on an in- 
creased scale. A new palace of enlarged dimensions and far 
greater architectural magnificence supersedes the palace of David. 
The seraglio is augmented, and reaches a point which has no 
known parallel. A throne of extraordinary grandeur proclaims 
in language intelligible to all the wealth and greatness of the 
empire. Above all, a sanctuary for the national worship is con- 
structed on the rock of Moriah, on which all the mechanical and 
artistic resources of the time are lavished ; and the Ark of the 
Covenant, whose wanderings have hitherto marked the unsettled 
and insecure condition of the nation, obtains at length a fixed and 
permanent resting-place. 



PAKT I.] JUDAEA. 49 

1 2. But close upon the heels of success and glory follows decline. 
The trade of Solomon — a State monopoly — enriched himself but 
not his subjects. The taxes, which he imposed on Decline of 
the provinces for the sustentation of his enormous the state. 
courts exhausted and impoverished them. His employment of 
vast masses of the people in forced labours of an unproductive 
character was a wrongful and uneconomical interference with 
industry, which crippled agriculture and aroused a strong feeling 
of discontent. Local jealousies were provoked by the excessive ex- 
altation of the tribe of Judah. The enervating influence of luxury 
began to be felt. Finally^ a subtle corruption was allowed to spread 
itself through all ranks by the encouragement given to false re- 
ligions^ religions whose licentious and cruel rites were subversive 
of the first principles of morality, and even of decency. The 
seeds of the disintegration which showed itself immediately upon 
the death of Solomon were sown during his lifetime; and it is 
only surprising that they did not come to light earlier and inter- 
fere more seriously with the prosperity of his long reign. 

Signs of disintegration in the empire during Solomon's reign ; — 1. Revolt 
of Damascus under Rezon, and re-establishment of the Damascene monarchy. 
2. Revolt of Hadad in Edom. 3. Attempted revolt of Jeroboam. 

13. On the death of Solomon, the disintegrating forces, already 
threatening the unity of the empire, received, through the folly of 
his successor, a sudden accession of strength, which „, . , . , 

' o 3 'J \ixxo, period, 

precipitated the catastrophe. Rehoboam, entreated b.c. 

to lighten the burthens of the Israelites, declared his 
intention of increasing their weight, and thus drove the bulk of his 
native subjects into rebellion. The disunion of the conquering 
people gave the conquered tribes an opportunity of throwing off 
the yoke, whereof with few exceptions they availed themselves. 
In lieu of the puissant State, which under David and Solomon 
took rank among the foremost powers of the earthy we have hence- 
forth to deal with two petty kingdoms of small account, the interest 
of whose history is religious rather than political. 

14. The kingdom of Israel, established by the revolt of Jero- 
boam, comprises ten out of the twelve tribes, 

and reaches from the borders of Damascus and ifrael, 

Hamath to within ten miles of Jerusalem. It in- '^■^• 

•' 975-721. 

eludes the whole of the Trans-Jordanic territory, 

and exercises lordship over the adjoining country of Moab. The 

E 



50 ASIATIC NATIONS. [book i. 

proportion of its population to that of Judah in the early times 
may be estimated as two to one. But the advantage of superior 
size, fertility, and population, is counterbalanced by the inferi- 
ority of every Israelite capital to Jerusalem, and by the funda- 
mental weakness of a government which, deserting purity of 
religion, adopts for expediency's sake an unauthorised and semi- 
idolatrous worship. In vain a succession of Prophets, some of 
them endowed with extraordinary miraculous power, struggled 
against this. fatal taint. Idolatry, intertwined with the nation's 
life, could not be rooted out. One form of the evil led on to 
other and worse forms. The national strength was sapped ; and 
it scarcely required an attack from without to bring the State to 
dissolution. The actual fall, however, is produced B.C. 721, by 
the growing power of Assyria, which has even at an earlier date 
forced some of the monarchs to pay tribute. 

Note, as remarkable features of the kingdom of Israel : — 1. The frequency 
of the dynastic changes, and the short average of the reigns. Nineteen 
monarchs are found in the brief space of 250 (or, according to the numbers 
assigned to the reigns, 230) years, giving an average of twelve or thirteen 
years to a reign. The kings belong to nine different families. Eight of them 
meet with violent deaths. Only two dynasties, those of Omri and Jehu, retain 
the throne for any considerable period. 2. The changes of the capital, which 
is first Shechem, then Tirzah, then Samaria. 3. The constant and exhausting 
wars («) with Judah, (b') with Damascus, (c) with Assyria ; and the want of an 
ally on whom dependence can be placed, Egypt being too remote, and Phoe- 
nicia too weak, to be serviceable. 

Iiine of Kings : — 1. Jeroboam, divinely appointed to his office. Leader of 
the rebellion. Establishes the national sanctuaries with idolatrous emblems 
at Dan and Bethel, and at the same time creates a new priesthood in oppo- 
sition to the Levitical. Great efflux of the Levites and other adherents of the 
old religion. War with Judah. Jeroboam helped by Shishak. Reigns twenty- 
two years (incomplete), B.C. 975 to 954. 2. Nadab, his son, reigns two years 
(incomplete), B.C. 954 to 953. Murdered by Baasha. 3. Baasha, reigns twenty- 
four years (incomplete), B.C. 953 to 930. Makes Tirzah the capital. Wars 
with Asa of Judah and Benhadad of Damascus. Exodus of pious Israelites 
continues. 4. Elah, his son, reigns two years (incomplete), B.C. 930 to 929. 
Murdered by one of his officers, 5. Zimri, against whom the army sets up 
Omri, the captain of the host. Zimri, in despair, burns himself in his palace. 
6. Omri has a rival for some time in Tibni, but outlives him. Reigns twelve 
years (incomplete), B.C. 929 to 918. Transfers the capital to Samaria, Wars 
with Damascus and makes a disgraceful peace. 7. Ahab, his son, succeeds. 
Reigns twenty-two years (incomplete), B.C. 918 to 897. Strengthens himself 
by contracting affinity with Eth-baal of Tyre and Jehoshaphat of Jerusalem. 
The Tyrian alliance leads to the introduction of Phoenician idolatry. Evil 
influence of the Phoenician princess Jezebel over her husband and sons. 
Advance of corruption and futile efforts of Elijah. Wars of Ahab with Syria 
and Assyria. He falls fighting against the Syrians at Ramoth - Gilead. 
8. Ahaziah, his son, reigns Httle more than a year, B.C. 897 to 896. Revolt 
of Moab. 9. Jehoram, brother of Ahaziah, succeeds and reigns twelve years, 
B.C. 896 to 884. The league with Judah continues. Wars with Moab, and 
with Hazael of Damascus. Jehoram, and the queen-mother Jezebel, are 



PAET I.] JUDjEA. 51 

murdered by Jehu. 10. Jehu is acknowledged king. He destroys the whole 
house of Ahab; and puts doM'n the worship of Baal, but maintains the idolatry 
of Jeroboam. Hazael deprives him of all his territory east of the Jordan. On 
one occasion at least he pays tribute to Assyria. Jehu reigns twenty-eight 
years, B.C. 884 to 856. He is succeeded by his son, 11. Jehoahaz, who reigns 
seventeen years, B.c. 856 to 839. He loses cities to Damascus, and submits to 
have the number of his standing army limited. 12. Jehoash, or Joash, his son, 
reigns sixteen years, B.C. 839 to 823. A revival of the Israelite power commences. 
Joash defeats Benhadad, son of Hazael, three times, and recovers part of his 
lost territory. He also defeats Amaziah, king of Judah, and takes Jerusalem, 
but allows Amaziah to continue king. He is succeeded by his son, 13. Jero- 
boam n, under whom the kingdom reaches the acme of its prosperity. In his 
long reign, estimated at forty-one, or by some at fifty-one, years, B.C. 823 to 
772, he not only recovered all the old Israelite territory, but even conquered 
Hamath and Damascus. He was succeeded, either immediately or after an 
interregnum, by his son, Zechariah, the fifth and last king of the house of Jehu. 

14. Zechariah, who reigned six months only, B.C. 772, was murdered by 

15. Shallum, who was in his turn assassinated, within little more than a month, 
by 16. Menahem of Tirzah. This enterpi-ising prince, bent on carrying out 
the policy of Jeroboam II, made an expedition to the Euphrates and took 
Thapsacus ; but having thereby provoked the hostility of an Assyrian (or 
Chaldeean) monarch, Pul, was attacked in his turn, and forced to become 
tributary. Menahem reigned ten years, B.C. 772 to 762. He left the crown 
to "his son, 17. Pekahiah, who was murdered by one of his officers, Pekah, 
after a reign of two years, B.C. 762 to 760. 18. Pekah then succeeded, and 
reigned either twenty or thirty years, B.C. 760 to 730. He was twice attacked 
by Tiglath-Pileser II, king of Assyria, who on the second occasion com- 
pletely desolated the Trans -Jordanic territory. His league with Rezin of 
Damascus was ineffectual against this enemy, though it reduced Judah to the 
verge of destruction. After the second invasion of Tiglath-Pileser, Pekah 
was murdered by Hoshea, who succeeded him, either directly or after an 
interregnum. 19. Hoshea, the last king, reigned nine years, from B.C. 730 
to 721. He at first accepted the position of tributary under Assyria, but, 
having obtained the alliance of Egypt, he shortly afterwards revolted. Shal- 
maneser, the Assyrian king, came up against him and commenced the siege 
of Samaria, which resisted for two years. It fell, however, shortly after 
Sargon's accession ; and with its fall the kingdom of Israel came to an end. 

15. The separate kingdom of Judah, commencing at the same 
date with that of Israel, outlasted it by considerably more than 
a century. Composed of two entire tribes only, 
with refugees from the remainder, and confined to judah, 
the lower and less fertile portion of the Holy ^•'^• 

^ ^ 975-586. 

Land, it compensated for these disadvantages by 
its compactness, its unity, the strong position of its capital, and 
the indomitable spirit of its inhabitants, who felt themselves 
the real 'people of God,' the true inheritors of the marvellous 
past, and the only rightful claimants of the greater marvels 
promised in the future. Surrounded as it was by petty enemies, 
Philistines, Arabians, Ammonites, Israelites, Syrians, and placed 
in the pathway between two mighty powers, Assyria and Egypt, 
its existence was continually threatened j but the valour of its 

E 2 



52 ASIATIC NATIONS. [book i. 

people and the protection of Divine Providence preserved it 
intact during a space of nearly four centuries. In striking con- 
trast with the sister kingdom of the north, it preserved during 
this long space, almost without a break, the hereditary succession 
of its kingSj who followed one another in the direct line of descent, 
as long as there was no foreign intervention. Its elasticity in 
recovering from defeat is most remarkable. Though forced re- 
peatedly to make ignominious terms of peace, though condemned 
to see on three occasions its capital in the occupation of an 
enemy, it rises from disaster with its strength seemingly unim- 
paired, defies Assyria in one reign, confronts Egypt in another, 
and is only crushed at last by the employment against it of the 
full force of the Babylonian empire. 

Xiine of Kings : — The throne is held by nineteen princes of the house of 
David and one usurping princess of the house of Omri, whose position as 
queen-mother enables her to seize the supreme power. The average length 
of the reigns is nineteen and a half years. \. Rehoboam, son of Solomon, 
reigns eighteen years (incomplete), B.C. 975 to 958. Forbidden by the 
prophet Shemaiah to attack Jeroboam, he fortifies his towns. Invasion of 
Shishak ; Jerusalem occupied and plundered. Jeroboam strengthened. Con- 
stant hostilities between Israel and Judah. Partial lapse of the people into 
idolatry. 2. Abijam, his son, reigns three years (incomplete), B.C. 958 to 
956. He attacks Jeroboam and gains a great victory. Captures Bethel and 
other towns. Makes a league with Benhadad. 3. Asa, his son. Attacked 
by Zerah the Ethiopian (Osorkon, king of Egypt ?), he completely defeats him. 
Attacked by Baasha, he detaches Benhadad from his alliance and gains advan- 
tages. Makes efforts to put down idolatry. Reigns forty-one years (incom- 
plete), B.C. 956 to 916. 4. Jehoshaphat, his son. Marries his son, Jehoram, 
to Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab, and makes alliance with the kingdom of 
Israel. Assists Ahab in his Syrian wars. Attempts to reopen the Ophir 
trade in conjunction with Ahaziah, but fails. Wars with Moab, Ammon, 
and Edom. Reigns twenty-five years (incomplete), B.C. 916 to 892. Suc- 
ceeded by 5. Jehoram, his son, who reigns eight years (incomplete), B.C. 
892 to 885. Successful revolt of Edom. The Philistines and Arabs attack 
and take Jerusalem. Jehoram gives encouragement to idolatry. 6. Ahaziah, 
his son, reigns one year only, being murdered by Jehu, king of Israel, B.C. 
884. He is succeeded by 7. Athaliah, his mother, the daughter of Ahab and 
Jezebel, who murders all the seed royal except the infant Joash, and makes 
herself queen. She reigns six years, B.C. 884 to 878, and substitutes the 
worship of Baal for that of Jehovah. Jehoiada the high-priest heads a i-ebel- 
lion, proclaims Joash, and puts Athaliah to death. 8. Joash, son of Ahaziah, 
succeeds. Reigns well as long as Jehoiada fives, then becomes idolatrous. 
Attacked by Hazael and forced to purchase a peace. Murdered by two of 
his subjects, after he had reigned forty years, B.C. 878 to 838. 9. Amaziah, 
his son, defeats the Edomites and takes Petra. Attacks Joash, who defeats 
him and captures Jerusalem, Reigns twenty-nine years, B.C. 838 to 809. 
Murdered at Lachish. 10. Azariah or Uzziah, his son, a great and warlike 
prince. Re-estabfishes the port of Elath. Conquers most of Phifistia. Defeats 
the Arabs. Receives tribute from Ammon. His attempt to invade the priest's 
office punished by leprosy. Reigns fifty-two years, B.C. 809 to 757. 11. Jotham, 
his son, who had been regent during his father's ifiness, succeeds. Reigns 
sixteen years (incomplete), B.C. 757 to 742. Fortifies Jerusalem. Forces 



PART II.] AFRICAN NATIONS. 5.3 

the Ammonites to pay tribute. Attacked by Rezin and Pekah in his last year. 

12. Ahaz, his son, reigns sixteen years, B.C. 742 to 726. Attacked by Rezin 
and Pekah, who defeat him and besiege Jerusalem, Ahaz calls in the aid of 
Tiglath-Pileser II of Assyria, and becomes his tributary. Pekah is chastised, 
Rezin slain, and Juda'a relieved. Ahaz introduces various foreign idolatries. 

13. Hezekiah, his son. Throws oft' the Assyrian yoke, defeats the Philistines, 
and re-establishes the pure worship of Jehovah. Attacked by Sennacherib, 
he submits and becomes tributary ; but soon afterwards he revolts and makes 
alliance with Egypt. Second invasion of Sennacherib, directed especially 
against Egypt, results in the complete destruction of his army, and in the 
relinquishment of his designs. Hezekiah receives an embassy from Babylon. 
Isaiah prophesies during his reign, which lasts twenty-nine years, from B.C. 
726 to 697. Hezekiah is succeeded by his son, 14. Manasseh, who reigns 
fifty-five years, from B.C. 697 to 642. In this reign, idolatry is firmly estab- 
lished, the temple shut up, and the law of Moses allowed to fall into complete 
disuse. The worshippers of Jehovah are also violently persecuted. Manasseh, 
suspected of an intention to rebel by the Assyrians, is carried captive to 
Babylon, but afterwards restored to his kingdom, where he effects a religious 
reformation. 15. His son, Amon, succeeds, but reigns only two years, during 
which he re-establishes the various idolatries which his father had first intro- 
duced and then abolished. He is murdered by conspirators, B.C. 640. 16. 
Josiah, his son, a boy of eight, mounts the throne, and reigns thirty-one years, 
B.C. 640 to 609. Abolition of idolatry, and restoration of the temple worship. 
Discovery of the Book of the Law. Scythian inroad. Palestine invaded by 
Nechoh, king of Egypt. Battle of Megiddo, and death of Josiah. 17. Jeho- 
ahaz, his second son, is made king by the people, but within three months is 
removed by Nechoh, who confers the crown on his elder brother, 18. Jehoi- 
akim, which he holds for four years as an Egyptian tributary, B.C. 609 to 605. 
Great expedition of Nebuchadnezzar ; defeat of Nechoh at Carchemish, and 
extension of the Babylonian dominion to the borders of Egypt. Jehoiakim 
submits, but afterwards rebels and is put to death, B.C. 605 to 598. 19. 
Jehoiachin, son of Jehoiakim, is made king by Nebuchadnezzar, but holds the 
throne for three months only, when he is carried captive to Babylon, with 
a great number of his subjects, B.C. 597. 20. Zedekiah, third son of Josiah, 
uncle of Jehoiachin, then rules as a Babylonian tributary ; but he too rebels, 
allies himself with Apries, king of Egypt, and defies the Chaldcean power. 
Nebuchadnezzar lays siege to Jerusalem, B.C. 588, and takes it B.C. 586. 
Zedekiah and the rest of the nation are carried captive to Babylon. 
Jeremiah prophesies during the reigns of Josiah and his three sons. 



PART II. AFRICAN NATIONS. 

Preliminary Remarks on the Geography of Ancient 

Africa. 

I. The continent of Africa ofFers a remarkable contrast to that 
of Asia in every important physical characteristic. Asia extend.*; 
itself through all three zones, the torrid, the frigid, 
and the temperate, and lies mainly in the last, or between Africa 
most favoured of them. Africa belongs almost en- ^" ^^^' 
tirely to the torrid zone, extending only a little way north and south 



54 AFRICAN NATIONS. [book i. 

into those portions of the two temperate zones which lie nearest 
to the tropics. Asia has a coast deeply indented with numerous 
bays and gulfs ; Africa has but one considerable indentation — the 
Gulf of Guinea on its western side. Asia, again, is traversed by 
frequent and lofty mountain chains, the sources from which flow 
numerous rivers of first-rate magnitude. Africa has but two great 
rivers, the Nile and the Niger, and is deficient in mountains of 
high elevation. Finally, Asia possesses numerous littoral islands 
of a large size ; Africa has but one such island, Madagascar j and 
even the islets which lie ojBF its coast are, comparatively speaking, 
few. 

2. Its equatorial position, its low elevation, and its want of 
important rivers render Africa the hottest^ the driest, and the 

most infertile of the four Continents. In the 

general" north a sea of sand^ known as the Sahara, stretches 

infertility of from east to west across the entire continent from 

the Atlantic to the Red' Sea, and occupies fully 

one-fifth of its surface. Smaller tracts of an almost equally 

arid character occur towards the south. Much of the interior 

consists of swampy jungle, impervious, and fatal to human 

life. The physical characteristics of the continent render it 

generally unapt for civilisation or for the growth of great states : 

it is only in a few regions that Nature wears a more benignant 

aspect, and offers conditions favourable to human progress. These 

regions are chiefly in the north .and the north-east, in the near 

vicinity of the Mediterranean and the Red Sea. 

3. It was only the more northern part of Africa that was known 
to the ancients, or that had any direct bearing on the history of 

„ the ancient world. Here the geographical features 

description of Were Very marked and striking. Firsts there lay 
or rica. ^,jQgg along the sea-shore, a narrow strip of generally 
fertile territory, watered by streams which emptied themselves 
into the Mediterranean. South of this was a tract of rocky 
mountain, less fitted for human habitation, though in places 
producing abundance of dates. Thirdly, came the Great Desert, 
interspersed with oases — islands in the sea of sand containing 
springs of water and a flourishing vegetation. Below the Sahara, 
and completely separated by it from any political contact with 
the countries of the north, but crossed occasionally by caravans 
for purposes of commerce, was a second fertile region, a land 



PAKTiL] AFRICAN NATIONS. 55 

of large rivers and lakes, where there were cities and a numerous 
population. 

4. The western portion of North Africa stood, in some respects, 
in marked contrast with the eastern. Towards the east the fertile 
coast -tract is in general exceedingly narrow, and Divisions- 
sparingly watered by a small number of insigni- i- Eastern 
ficant streams. The range of bare rocky hills from 2 Westei-n 
which they flow — the continuation of Atlas — is portion. 

of low elevation; and the Great Desert often approaches within 
a very short distance of the coast. Towards the west the lofty 
range of Atlas, running at a considerable distance (200 miles) 
from the shore^ allows a broad tract of fertile ground to intervene 
between its crest and the sea. The range itself is well wooded, 
and gives birth to many rivers of a fair size. Here states of im- 
portance may grow up, for the resources of the tract are great; 
the soil is good; the climate not insalubrious; but towards the 
east Nature has been a niggard; and, from long. 10° E. nearly 
to long. 30°, there is not a single position where even a second- 
rate state could long maintain itself. 

5. The description of North Africa, which has been here given, 
holds good as far as long. 30°; but east of this line there commences 
another and very different region. From the high- ^ . . 

J " <-' Description 

lands of Abyssinia and the great reservoirs on the line of the 
of the equator, the Nile rolls down its vast body of -^^^^^ valley, 
waters with a course, whose general direction is from south to 
north, and meeting the Desert flows across it in a mighty stream, 
which renders this corner of the continent the richest and most 
valuable of all the tracts contained in it. The Nile valley is 3,000 
miles long, and, in its upper portion, of unknown width. When it 
enters the Desert, about lat. 16°, its width contracts; and from the 
sixth cataract down to Cairo, the average breadth of the cultivable 
soil does not exceed fifteen miles. This soil, however, is of the 
best possible quality ; and the possession of the strip on either side 
of the river, and of the broader tract known as the Delta, about 
its mouth, naturally constitutes the power which holds it a great 
and important state. The proximity of this part of Africa to 
Western Asia and to Europe, its healthiness and comparatively 
temperate climate, likewise favoured the development in this region 
of an early civilisation and the formation of a monarchy which 
played an important part in the history of the ancient world. 



56 AFRICAN NATIONS. [book i. 

6. Above the point at which the Nile enters the Desert, on the 
right or east bank of the stream, occurs another tract, physically 

very remarkable, and capable of becoming politically 
betwSn"the o^ ^^ig^ consideration. Here there is interposed 

Nile and the between the main stream of the Nile and the Red 
Red Sea 

Sea an elevated table-land, 8,000 feet above the 

ocean-level, surrounded and intersected by mountains, which rise 

in places to the height of 15,000 feet. These lofty masses attract 

and condense the vapours that float in from the neighbouring 

sea ; and the country is thus subject to violent rains, which during 

the summer months fill the river-courses, and flowing down them 

to the Nile, are the cause of that stream's periodical overflow, and 

so of the rich fertility of Egypt. The abundance of moisture 

renders the plateau generally productive ; and the region, which 

may be regarded as containing from 200,000 to 250,000 square 

miles, is thus one well capable of nourishing and sustaining a 

power of the first mag;iitude. 

7. The nations inhal /^ing Northern Africa in the times an- 

terior ta Gyms were, according to the belief of 
divtsion^of ^^e Greeks, five. These were the Egyptians, the 
Northern Ethiopians, the Greeks, the Phoenicians, and the 

xVincci. 

Libyans, 
i. Egypt. To the Egyptians belonged the Nile valley from 
lat. 34° to the coast J together with the barren region between 
that valley and the Red Sea, and the fertile tract of the Faioom 
about Moeris, on the opposite side of the stream. Its most 
important portion was the Delta, which contained about 8,000 
square miles, and was studded with cities of note. The chief. 
towns were, however, in the narrow valley. These were 
Memphis, not much above the apex of the Delta, and Thebes, 
about lat. 26°. Besides these, the places of importance were, in 
Upper Egypt, Elephantine and Chemmis, or Panopolis • in the 
lower country, Heliopolis, Sai's, Sebennytus^ Mendes, Tanis, 
Bubastis, and Pelusium. The Nile was the only Egyptian 
river ; but at the distance of about ninety miles from the sea, 
the great stream divided itself into three distinct channels, 
known as the Canobic, the Sebennytic, and the Pelusiac branches ; 
while, lower down, these channels further subdivided themselves, 
so that in the time of Herodotus the Nile waters reached the 
Mediterranean by seven distinct mouths. Egypt had one large 



PABTii.] AFRICAN NATIONS. 57 

and several smaller lakes. The large lake, known by the name 
of Moeris, lay on the west side of the Nile, in lat. 29° 50'. It was 
believed to be artificial, but was really a natural depression. 

ii. Ethiopia. The Ethiopians held the valley of the Nile above 
Egypt, and the whole of the plateau from which descend the great 
Nile affluents, the modern country of Abyssinia. Their chief 
city was Meroe. Little was known of the tract by the ancients j 
but it was believed to be excessively rich in gold. A tribe called 
Troglodyte Ethiopians — i. e. Ethiopians who burrowed under- 
ground — is mentioned as inhabiting the Sahara where it adjoins 
upon Fezzan. 

iii. Greek Settlements. The Greeks had colonised the portion 
of Northern Africa which approached most nearly to the Pelo- 
ponnese, having settled at Gyrene about b.c. 630^ and at Barca 
about seventy years afterwards. They had also a colony at 
Naucratis in Egypt, and perhaps a settlr Jnt at the greater 
Oasis. 

iv. Libyans. The Libyans possessed the greater part of 
Northern Africa, extending, as they did. from the borders of 
Egypt to the Atlantic Ocean, and from the Mediterranean to 
the Great Desert. They were divided into a number of tribes, 
among which the following were the most remarkable: — the 
Adyrmachidae, who bordered on Egypt, the Nasamonians on the 
greater Syrtis, the Garamantes in the modern Fezzan, and the 
Atlantes in the range of Atlas. Most of these races were no- 
madic; but some of the more western cultivated the soil and, 
consequently, had fixed abodes. Politically, all these tribes were 
excessively weak. 

V. Carthage. The Cathaginians, or Liby-Phoenicians — immi- 
grants into Africa, like the Greeks — had fixed themselves in 
the fertile region north of the Atlas chain, at the point where 
it approaches nearest to Sicily. Here in a cluster lay the im- 
portant towns of Carthage, Lltica^ Hippo Zaritus^ Tunis, and 
Zama Regia, while a little removed were Adrumetum, Leptis, 
and Hippo Regius. The entire tract was fertile and well 
watered, intersected by numerous ranges, spurs from the main 
chain of Atlas. Its principal river was the Bagrada (now 
Majerdah), which emptied itself into the sea a little to the north- 
west of Carthage. The entire coast was indented by numerous 
bays ; and excellent land-locked harbours were formed by salt lakes 



58 AFRICAN NATIONS. [book i. 

connected with the sea by narrow channels. Such was the 
Hipponites Palus (L. Benzart) near Hippo Zaritus, and the great 
harbour of Carthage, now that of Tunis. Next to the Nile 
valley, this was the portion of Northern Africa most favoured by 
Nature, and best suited for the habitation of a great power. 



HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE ANCIENT 
AFRICAN STATES. 

A. History of Egypt from the Earliest Times to the 
Persian Conquest.. 

Sources. 1. Native : including («) the JMonuments themselves, which are 
either inscriptions on buildings, sarcophagi, &c., or writings on papyrus. 
Only a portion of these have been edited, The best collections are : 
Lepsius, Denkm'dler. Berlin; commenced in 1849, and still in progress. A 
magnificent work. BruGSCH, H., Geographische Inschriften alt'dgyptischer 
Denkm'dler. Leipzig, 1857-60; 3 vols. 4to. Champollion le Jeune, 
Monuments de VEgypte et de la Nubie, Paris, 1835-45; 4 vols. foho. 
ROSELLINI, I monumenti dell Egitto e della Nubia. Pisa, 1832-43 ; text, 9 vols. 
8vo. ; plates, 3 vols, folio. Important works on single subjects are Lepsius, 
Konigsbuch der alten ^gypten. Berlin, 1858; 2 vols, 4to. ; and Wilkinson, 
Turin Papyrus. London. (^) The history of Manetho, written in Greek, 
about B.C. 260, but now existing only in fragments, and in the epitomes of 
Eusebius and Africanus (the latter known to us through Syncellus). The 
fragments have been collected and edited by C. Muller in his Fragmenta 
Hisioricorum Gr<Ecorum, vol. ii. 

2. Jeivish. Important notices of thfe condition of Egypt are contained in 
the Pentateuch, especially in Genesis and Exodus ; and likewise in Kings, 
Chronicles, and Jeremiah. Until the time of Rehoboam, however, the Egyptian 
monarchs, unfortunately, are not mentioned by name, the title, Pharaoh, 
being used instead. This renders it impossible to identify, except con- 
jecturally, the earlier Egyptian monarchs of Scripture with monumental or 
Manethonian kings. 

3. Greek, (a) The earliest, and in most respects the best Greek authority, 
is Herodotus, who reports faithfully what the Egyptian priests communicated 
to him as the history of their country, when he visited Egypt about B.C. 460 
to 450. If he is credulous with regard to the exaggerated chronology 
required by the priestly system, we must remember that he had no means 
of knowing how long mankind had existed upon the earth. The sketch of 
Egyptian history supplied to him was scanty and incomplete, but in few 
respects untrue. It was, in a peculiar sense, monumental history, i.e. it was 
such a history as would naturally be obtained by a traveller, who inquired 
principally concerning the founders of the great pubhc edifices which came 
under his notice. The list of monarchs obtained in this way was, of course, 
not consecutive ; but the kings themselves were real personages, and the actual 
order of their reigns was only at one point seriously deranged. Herodotus 
adds to his account of the Egyptian history a most graphic description of their 
manners, customs, and religious rites — a description which, though disfigured 
by some rhetorical exaggerations, and not free from mistakes of the kind 



PAET II.] EGYPT. 59 

which a foreigner who pays a short visit to a country always makes, is yet by 
far the best and fullest account of these matters that has come down to us 
from ancient times. {Ji) The Greek writer who comes next to Herodotus 
in the copiousness with which he treats Egyptian affairs is Diodorus, who, 
hke Herodotus, visited Egypt, and who also professed to draw his narrative 
from information furnished him by the priests. The Egyptian history of 
Diodorus is, however, so manifestly based on that of Herodotus, which it 
merely supplements to a certain extent, that we can scarcely suppose it to 
have been drawn quite independently from native sources. Rather we must 
regard him as taking Herodotus for his basis, and as endeavouring to fill out 
the sketch with which that writer had furnished his countrymen. Apparently 
he was wholly ignorant of the history of Manetho. It is remarkable that the 
additions which Diodorus makes to the scheme of Herodotus are in almost 
every instance worthless. He deserves credit, however, for pointing out that 
the monarchs in Herodotus' list are often not consecutive, but separated from 
each other by intervals of several generations, (c) Eratosthenes of Gyrene, 
and Apollodorus the chronographer, treated Egyptian chronology from their 
own point of view, manipulating it at their pleasure in a way that was 
sufficiently arbitrary. They are of scarcely any value. 

Modern works on the subject of Egyptian History are numerous 
and important. The best are : — 

Champollion LE Jeune, VEgypte sous les Pharaons, on Recherches sur la 
i Geographie, la Religion, la Langue, les Ecritures, et I'Histoire de VEgypte a-vant 
Pin-vasion de Cambyse. Paris, 1814; 2 vols. 

Bunsen, Baron, jEgypten's Stelk in der Weltgeschichte. Hamburg, 1845-57; 
6 vols. Bvo. Translated into English under the title of Egypt's Place in 
Universal History, by GOTTRELL and BiRCH. London, 1848-67 ; 5 vols. Bvo. 
Rather materials for history than history itself. 

KenriCK, Ancient Egypt under the Pharaohs. London, 1850 ; 2 vols. Bvo. 

Lepsius, Chronologic der JEgypter, Einleitung und Erster Theil : Kritik der 
Quellen. Berlin, 1849 ; 4to. 

Poole, R. S., RorcR Mgyptiaca. London, 1B51; and article on Egypt in 
Dr. W. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, vol. i. 

Wilkinson, Sir G., Historical Notice of Egypt in RawlinsON's Herodotus, 
vol. ii. London, 1858-60. 
i Palmer, W., Egyptian Chronicles, ivith a Harmony of Sacred and Egyptian 
Chronology, and an Appendix of Assyrian and Babylonian Antiquities. London, 
1861 ; 2 vols. 8vo. 

BrugSCH, H., Histoire de VEgypte des les premiers temps de son existence, 
Leipzig, 1859; 4to., i vol. published; to be completed in 3 vols. 

On the Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, the 
great work is— 

Wilkinson, Sir G., Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, including 
their Private Life, Government, La<ws, Sfc, derived from a Comparison of the 
Paintings, Sculptures, and Ornaments still existing, ivith the Accounts of Ancient 
Authors. London, 1837-41 ; 6 vols. Bvo. 

Tiie best general account of the country will be found in the 

Description de VEgypte, ou Recueil des Observations et des Recherches qui ont 
ete faites en Egypte pendant V Expedition de V Armee Franqaise. Paris, 1809-20. 
Text 9 vols, folio ; plates, 14 vols, folio. 

Smaller works, suitable for the ordinary student, are — 

Wilkinson, Sir G., Modem Egypt and Thebes. London, 1843 ; 2 vols. 8vo.; 
and Handbook for Egypt. London, 1858 ; 2nd edition, Bvo. 



-t 



6o AFRICAN NATIONS. [book i. 

I. The early establishment of monarchical government in Egypt 

is indicated in Scripture by the mention of a Pharaoh as contem- 

... ^ porary with Abraham. The full account which is 

Antiquity of ^ ^ 

the Egyptian given of the general character of the kingdom ad- 
monaic y. ministered by Joseph suggests as the era of its 
foundation a date considerably more ancient than that of 
Abraham's visit. The priests themselves claimed for the mo- 
narchy, in the time of Herodotus, an antiquity of above ti,ooo 
years. Manetho, writing after the reduction of his country by the 
Macedonians, was more moderate, assigning to the thirty dynasties 
which, according to him, preceded the Macedonian conquest, a 
number of years amounting in the aggregate to rather more than 
5,000. The several items which produce this amount may be 
correct, or nearly so ; but, if their sum is assumed as measuring 
the duration of the monarchy, the calculation will be largely in 
excess j for the Egyptian monuments show that Manetho's dynas- 
ties were often reigning at the same time in diflFerent parts of the 
country. The difficulty of determining the true chronology of 
early Egypt arises from an uncertainty as to the extent to which 
Manetho's dynasties were contemporary. The monuments prove 
a certain amount of contemporaneity. But it is unreasonable to 
suppose that they exhaust the subject, or do more than indicate 
a practice the extent of which must be deterjnined, partly by 
examination of our documents, partly by reasonable conjecture. 
3. A careful examination of the names and numbers in Mane- 
, tho's lists, and a laborious investigation of the monu 

Arrangement ' ° 

of Manetho's ments, have led the best English Egyptologers to 
'^'^^' construct, or adopt, the subjoined scheme, as that 

which best expresses the real position in which Manetho's first 
seventeen dynasties stood to one another. 



PABT II.] 



EGYPT. 



6i 



About 

B.C. 

2700 



2500 



2400 



First 
Dynasty, 
Thinite. 



Second 
Dynasty, 
Thinite. 



Third 
Dynasty, 
Memphite. 



Fourth 
Dynasty, 
Memphite. 



Sixth 
Dynasty, 
Memphite, 



Fifth 
Dynasty, 
Elephan- 
tine. 



Ninth 
Dynasty, 
Heracleo- 

polite. 



1900 



1800 



1700 
1600 



Seventh 
and Eighth 
Dynasties, 
Memphite. 



Eleventh 
Dynasty, 
Thebans. 



Twelfth 
Dynasty, 
Thebans. 



Fourteenth 
Dynasty, 
Xoites. 



Thirteenth 
Dynasty, 
Thebans. 



Tenth 
Dynasty, 
Heracleo- 

polite. 



Fifteenth 
Dynasty, 
Shepherds. 



Sixteenth 

Dynasty, 

Shepherds. 



Seventeenth 
Dynasty, 
Shepherds. 



3. It will be seen that, according to this scheme, there were in 
Egypt during the early period, at one time two, at another three, 
at another five or even six, parallel or contem- 
poraneous kingdoms, established in different parts 
of the country. For example, while the first and 
second dynasties of Manetho were ruling at This, 
his third, fourth, and sixth bore sway at Memphis 



Contemporary 

kingdoms 

from B. c. 

2700-1525. 

: and, during 



62 



AFRICAN NATIONS. 



[book. I. 



a portion of this time, his fifth dynasty was ruling at Elephantine, 
his ninth at Heracleopolis, and his eleventh at Thebes or Dios- 
polis. And the same general condition of things prevailed till 
near the close of the sixteenth century B.C., when Egypt was, 
probably for the first time, united into a single kingdom, ruled 
from the one centre, Thebes. 

4. It is doubtful how far the names and numbers in Manetho's 
first and third dynasties are historical. The correspondence of 

Manetho's ^^^ name,-Menes (M'na), with that of other traditional 
first and third founders of nations, or first men, — with the Manes 

perhaps iin- of Lydia, the Phrygian Manis, the Cretan Minos, 

historical, ^]^^ Indian Menu, the German Mannus, and the like — 
raises a suspicion that here too we are dealing with a fictitious 
personage, an ideal and not a real founder. The improbably 
long reign assigned to M'na (sixty or sixty-two years), and his 
strange death — he is said to have been killed by a hippopotamus 
— increase the doubt which the name ' causes. M'na's son and 
successor, Athothis (Thoth), the Egyptian iEsculapius, seems to 
be equally mythical. The other names are such as may have 
been borne by real kings, and it is possible that in Manetho's 
time they existed on monuments ; but the chronology, which, in 
the case of the first dynasty, gives an average of thirty-two or 
thirty-three years to a reign, is evidently in excess, and cannot 
be trusted. 



First Dynasty (Thinite). 



Kings. 



1. Menes .... 

2. Athothis (his son) 

3. Kenkenes (his son) 

4. Uenephes (his son) 

5. Usaphsedus (his son) 

6. Miebidus (his son) 

7. Semempses (his son) 

8. Bieneches (his son) 



Years. 



Euseb. Afric, 



60 

27 

39 
42 
20 
26 
18 
26 



258 



62 
57 
31 
23 
20 
26 
18 
26 



Third Dynasty (Memphite). 



Kings. 



263 



1. Necherophes 

2. Tosorthras . 

3. Tyreis . . 

4. Mesochris . 

5. Suphis . . 

6. Tosertasis . 

7. Aches . . . 

8. Sephuris . . 

9. Kerpheres . 



Years. 



Euseb. Afric 



298 



28 

29 

7 

17 
16 

19 

42 

30 
26 



214 



5. With Manetho's second and fourth dynasties we reach the 
time of contemporary monuments, and feel ourselves on sure 



PART II.] EGYPT. 63 

historical ground. The tomb of Koeechus (Ke-ke-ou), the second 
king of the second dynasty, has been found near j^^^j history 
the pyramids of Gizeh ; and Soris (Shure), Suphis begins with 
I (Shufu), Suphis II (Nou-Shufu), and Mencheres °of pyramid ^ 
(Men-ka-re), the first four kings of the fourth, are builders and 

\ '^ '-' _^ contemporary 

known to us from several inscriptions. There second and 
is distinct monumental evidence that the second, *^^* dynasties, 
fourth, and fifth dynasties were contemporary. The fourth was 
the principal one of the three, and bore sway at Memphis over 
Lower Egypt, while the second ruled Middle Egypt from This^ 
and the fifth Upper Egypt from Elephantine. Probably the kings 
of the second and fifth dynasties were connected by blood with 
those of the fourth, and held their respective crowns by per- 
mission of the Memphite sovereigns. The tombs of monarchs 
belonging to all three dynasties exist in the neighbourhood of 
Memphis ; and there is even some doubt whether a king of 
the fifth, Shafre, was not the true founder of the 'Second 
Pyramid' near that city. 

6. The date of the establishment at Memphis of the fourth 
dynasty is given variously as B.C. 3309 (Bunsen), b.c. 2450 (Wil- 
kinson), and B.C. 2440 (Poole). And the time during The fourth 
which it occupied the throne is estimated variously dynasty. 
at 240, 3i05and 155 years. The Egyptian practice of association 
is a fertile source of chronological confusion ; and all estimates 
of the duration of a dynasty, so long as the practice continued, 
are mainly conjectural. Still the comparatively low dates of the 
English Egyptologers are on every ground preferable to the higher 
dates of the Germans j and the safest conclusion that can be 
drawn from a comparison of Manetho with the monuments 
seems to be, that a powerful monarchy was established at 
Memphis as early as the middle of the twenty-fifth century b.c, 
which was in some sort paramount over the whole country. The 
kings of this dynasty were the following : — 

1. Soris (Shure), who reigned twenty-nine years according to Manetho, and 
built the northern pyramid of Abooseer, on the blocks of which his name has 
been found. 2. Suphis I (Shufu), the Cheops of Herodotus and Ghembes of 
Diodorus Siculus, the builder of the ' Great Pyramid,' to whom Manetho gives 
a reign of sixty-three years. 3. Suphis II (Nou-Shufu), his brother, who 
reigned conjointly with Suphis I, and took part in the construction of the 
' Great Pyramid.' He outlived his brother by at least three years. 4. Men- 
cheres (Men-ka-re), the Mycerinus of Herodotus and Diodorus, perhaps the 
son of Suphis I, the builder of the ' Third Pyramid,' which contained his 
sarcophagus. He reigned, like Suphis I, sixty-three years. 5. Ratoises, 



64 AFRICAN NATIONS. [book i. 

twenty-five years. 6. Bicheris, twenty-two years. 7. Sebercheres, seven 
years. And 8. Thamphthis, nine years. Probable duration of the dynasty, 
about 2 20 years. 

7. It is evident from the monuments that the civilisation of 

Egypt at this early date was in many respects of an advanced 

order. A hiffh decree of mechanical science and 

Advanced ° ° 

: civilisation of skill is implied in the quarrying, transporting, and 
^r^ tin!e"^ raising into place of the huge blocks whereof the 
about B. c. pyramids are composed, and considerable mathe- 
matical knowledge in the emplacement of each 
pyramid so as exactly to face the cardinal points. Writing appears 
in no rudimentary form, but in such a shape as to imply long use. 
Besides the hieroglyphics, which are well and accurately cut, a 
cursive character is seen on some of the blocks, the precursor of 
the later hieratic. The reed-pen and inkstand are among the 
hieroglyphics employed; and the scribe appears, pen in hand, 
in the paintings on the tombs^ making notes on linen or papyrus. 
The drawing of human and animal figures is fully equal, if not 
superior, to that of later times; and the trades represented are 
nearly the same as are found under the Ramesside kings. Alto- 
gether it is apparent that the Egyptians of the Pyramid period were 
not just emerging out of barbarism, but were a people who had 
made very considerable progress in the arts of life. 

8. The governmental system was not of the simple character 
which is found in kingdoms recently formed out of village or 

tribe communities,' but had a complicated organi- 
govemmental sation of the sort which usually grows up with time. 
system. Egypt was divided into nomes, each of which had 
its governor. The military and civil services were separate, 
and each possessed various grades and kinds of functionaries. 
The priest caste was as distinct as in later times, and performed 
much the same duties. 

9. Aggressive war had begun to be waged. The mineral trea- 
sures of the Sinaitic peninsula excited the cupidity of the Mem- 
Aggressive Politic kings, and Soris, the first king of the dynasty, 

wars. seems to have conquered and occupied it. The 

perhaps built coppcr mines of Wady Maghara and Sarabit-el- 

by captives. Kadim Were worked by the great Pyramid monarchs, 

whose operations there were evidently extensive. Whether there 

is any ground for regarding the kings in question as especially 

tyrannical, may perhaps be doubted. One of them was said to 



PART II.] 



EGYPT. 



65 



have written a sacred book, and another (according to Herodotus) 
had the character of a mild and good monarch. The pyramids 
may have been built by the labour of captives taken in war; in 
which case the native population would not have suffered by 
their erection. 

Contemporary Dynasties from about B.C. 2440 to 2220. 



Branch Dynasty. 
IT. Thinite. 


CmEF OR Stem 

Dynasty. 
IV. Memphite. 


Branch Dynasty. 
V. Elephantine. 


1. BoethusorBochu 

2. Kceechus (Ke-ke 

ou) . . . 

3. Binothris . . 

4. Tlas. . . . 


s 


Yrs. 
38 

39 
47 
17 
41 
17 
25 
48 
30 



302 


I. 

2. 
3- 

4- 

5- 
6. 

7- 
8. 


Soris .... 
Suphis I . . "1 
Suphis II (bro- )■ 

ther) ... J 
Mencheres (son 

of Suphis I) 
Ratoises . . . 
Bichei-is . . . 
Sebercheres . . 
Thamphthis . . 


Yrs. 
29 

66 

^l 

25 
22 

7 
9 

221 


1. Usercheres (Osir- 

kef) .... 

2. Sephres (Shafr^) . 

3. Nephercheres 

(Nofr-ir-ke-re) . 

4. Sisires (Osir-n-re) 

5. Cheres .... 

6. Rathures . . . 

7. Mencheres . . 

8. Tancheres . . . 

9. Onnus (U-na6) . 


Yrs. 

28 
13 

20 

7 
20 

44 

9 

44 

33 

218 


5. Sethenes . . 

6. Chceres . . 

7. Nephercheres 

8. Sesochris . . 

9. Cheneres . . 



] o. The fourth or ' pyramid' dynasty was succeeded at Mem- 
phis by the sixth Manethonian dynasty, about B.C. 3220. The 
second and fifth still bore sway at This and Elephan- ^j^ .^^j^ 
tine; while wholly new and probably independent and parallel 
dynasties now started up at Heracleopolis and ^^^ ^^^' 
Thebes. The Memphitic kings lost their pre-eminence. Egypt 
was broken up into really separate kingdoms, among which the 
Theban gradually became the most powerful. 



Contemporary Dynasties from about B.C. 2220 to 2080. 



II. 

Thinite. 


VI. Memphite. 


V. Ele- 
phantine. 


IX.Herac- 
LEOPOLITE. 


XI. Theban. 


(Continuing 

under the 

last three 

kings.) 


I. Othoes . . 
[2. Phios . . . 

3. Methosuphis 

4. Phiops (Pepi) 

5. Menthesuphis 

6. Nitocris 

(Neit-akret) 


Yrs. 
30 

53 
7] 
100 
1 

12 
143 


(Continuing.) 


Achthoes 

(Muntopt I. 

Series 

of 

Enentefs. 

Muntopt II.) 


Sixteen kings. 

17. Ammenemes 
(Amun-m-h^). 



66 



AFRICAN NATIONS. 



[book I. 



1 1 . The weakness of Egypt, thus parcelled out into five king- 
doms, tempted foreign attack; and, about b.c. 2080, or a little 

Invasion of later, a powerful enemy entered Lower Egypt from 
Lowe?Egypt ^^^ north-east, and succeeded m destroying the 

conquered. Memphite kingdom, and obtaining possession of 
almost the whole country below lat. 29° 30'. These were the 
so-called Hyk-sos, or Shepherd Kings, nomades from either Syria 
or Arabia, who exercised with extreme severity all the rights of 
conquerors, burning the cities, razing the temples to the ground, 
exterminating the male Egyptian population, and making slaves 
of the women and children. There is reason to believe that at 
least two' Shepherd dynasties (Manetho's fifteenth and sixteenth) 
were established simultaneously in the conquered territory, the 
fifteenth reigning at Memphis, and the sixteenth either in the 
Delta, or at Avaris (Pelusium ?). Native Egyptian dynasties 
continued, however, to hold much of the country. The ninth 
(Heracleopolite) held the Faioom and the Nile valley southwards 
as far as Hermopolis ; the twelfth bore sway at Thebes ; the fifth 
continued undisturbed at Elephantine. In the heart, moreover, 
of the Shepherd conquests, a new native kingdom sprang up ; and 
the fourteenth (Xoite) dynasty maintained itself throughout the 
whole period of Hyksos ascendency in the most central portion 
of the Delta. 



Contemporary Dynasties from about B.C. 2080 to 1900. 



V. Ele- 
phantine. 


IX. Herac- 
leopolite. 


XII. Theban. 


XIV. 

Xoite. 


XV. 
Shepherds. 


XVI.Shee 

HERDS. 


(Continuing 
till about 
B.C. 1850.) 


(Continuing.) 


1. Sesonchosis, son 

of Ammenemes 
(Sesortasen I) . 

2. Ammenemes II 

(Amun-m-h^ II) 

3. Sesostris (Sesor- 

tasen II) . . , 


Yrs. 

46 

38 

48 


Seventy- 
six 
kings 
in 
484 
years. 


1. Salatis . 

2. Bnon . . 

3. Apachnas 


Yrs. 

44 
36 


Thirty king 
in 518 
years. 






4. [La]mares 

(Amun-m-h^III) 

5. Ameres . . . 

6. Ammenemes III 
(Amun-m-h6IV) 

7. Skemiophris (his 

sister) .... 


8 
8 

8 

4 




4. Apophis . 

5. Jannas . 

6. Asses . . 


61 
50 
49 








XIII. Theban. 


1 60 






259 





PAET II.] EGYPT. 67 

13. Simultaneously with the irruption of the Shepherds occurred 
an increase of the power of Thebes, which, under the monarchs of 
the twelfth dynasty, the Sesortasens and Amun-m-hes r^^^ twelfth 
acquired a paramount authority over all Egypt from (Theban) 
the borders of Ethiopia to the neighbourhood of Mem- howrthe 
phis. The Elephantine and Heracleopolite dynas- Hyksos in 
ties, though continuing, became subordinate. Even 
Heliopolis, below Memphis, owned the authority of these powerful 
monarchs, who held the Sinaitic peninsula_, and carried their arms 
into Arabia and Ethiopia. Amun-m-he III, who seems to be the 
Maris (or Lamaris) of Manetho and the Moeris of Herodotus, con- 
structed the remarkable work in the Faioom known as the Laby- 
rinth, Sesortasen I built numerous temples, and erected an 
obelisk. Architecture and the arts generally flourished; irriga- 
tion was extended; and the oppression of Lower Egypt under 
the rude Shepherd kings seemed for a considerable time to have 
augmented, rather than diminished, the prosperity of the Upper 
country. 

13. But darker days arrived. The Theban monarchs of the 
tlrirteenth dynasty, less warlike or less fortunate than their pre- 
decessors, found themselves unable to resist the The 
terrible ' Shepherds,' and, quitting their capital, fled mi^gban^ 
into Ethiopia, while the invaders wreaked their dynasty. 
vengeance on the memorials of the Sesortasens. conquer"^ 
Probably, after a while, the refugees returned and Upper Egypt, 
took up the position of tributaries, a position which must also have 
been occupied by all the other native monarchs who still main- 
tained themselves, excepting possibly the Xoites, who may have 
found the marshes of the Delta an effectual protection. The com- 
plete establishment of the authority of the 'Shepherds' may be 
dated about b.c. 1900. Their dominion lasted till about b.c. 1525. 
The seventh and eighth (Memphitic) dynasties, the tenth (Hera- 
cleopolite), and the seventeenth (Shepherd) belong to this interval. 
This is the darkest period of Egyptian history. The 'Shepherds' 
left no monuments ; and during nearly 300 years the very names 
of the kings are unknown to us. 

14. A new day breaks upon us with the accession to power of 
Manetho's eighteenth dynasty, about b.c. 1525. A j^g^Q^^ ^^^^^ 
great national movement, headed by Amosis (Ames Amosis. 

or Aahmes), king of the Thebaid, drove the foreign invaders, after 

F a 



68 AFRICAN NATIONS. [book i. 

a stout conflict, from the soil of Egypt, and, releasing the country 
Expulsion of ^0^1 the incubus which had so long lain upon it^ 
the Hyksos. allowed the genius of the people free play. The 

Most flourish- ^ ,.^ .,^„:,. /,, , 

ing period of most flourishing period of Egyptian history tollowed. 
^Ef\l'L The Theban king, who had led the movement, 

1525 1200, °' • '^ 

eighteenth, received as his reward the supreme authority over 
and'twenttth the whole country, a right which was inherited by 
dynasties. ^js successors. Egypt WES henceforth, until the time 
of the Ethiopic conquest, a single centralised monarchy. Con- 
temporary dynasties ceased. Egyptian art attained its highest 
perfection. The great temple-palaces of Thebes were built. 
Numerous obelisks were erected. Internal prosperity led to 
aggressive wars. Ethiopia, Arabia, and Syria were invaded. The 
Euphrates was crossed j and a portion of Mesopotamia added to 
the empire. 

Kings of the Eighteenth Dynasty: — 1. Amos (Ames or Aahmes). Led 
the insurrection. Expelled the Shepherds. Reigned twenty-six years, B.C. 
1525 to 1499. 2. Amunoph I. Married the widow of Amos. Reigned twenty- 
one years, B.C. 1499 to 1478. 3. Thothmes I. Warred in Ethiopia. On his 
death, Amen-set, his daughter, became regent for his infant sons, 4. Thothmes 
II, who died a minor, and 5. Thothmes III, who became full king, after 
Amen-set (Amensis of Manetho) had held office for twenty-two years. This 
monarch was one of the most remarkable of the dynasty. He warred in 
Ethiopia, Arabia, Syria, and Western Mesopotamia, and is thought to declare 
that he took tribute from Nineveh, Is (Hit), and Babylon. His temples and 
other buildings at Karnac, Thebes, Memphis, Heliopolis, Goptos, and other 
places are magnificent. He reigned at least forty-seven years, including the 
time of his minority, from about B.C. 1461 to 1414. 6. Amunoph II, his son, 
whom he associated shortly before his death, succeeded him. His reign was 
short and uneventful. He was followed by his son, 7. Thothmes IV (Tuth- 
mosis of Manetho), who cut the great sphinx near the Pyi-amids. He warred 
with the Libyans and the Ethiopians. His queen, Maut-m-va, appears to 
have been a foreigner. 8. Amunoph III, son of Thothmes IV and Maut-m-va, 
succeeded about B.C. 1400. He was a great and powerful sovereign. Military 
expeditions were made in his reign against most of the countries previously 
attacked by Thothmes III. Many great buildings were erected. Agriculture 
was improved by the construction of tanks or reservoirs. The two large 
Colossi were made, one of which is known as ' the vocal Memnon.' Amunoph 
further introduced some religious changes, which are obscure, but which seem 
to have been very distasteful to his subjects. He reigned at least thirty-six 
years, about B.C. 1400 to 1364. 9. Horus, his son, succeeded as legitimate 
king ; but at the same time pretenders started up, possibly among his brothers 
and sisters, and for about thirty years the country was distracted by the claims 
of various sovereigns. Horus, however, conquered or outlived his rivals, and 
in his later years obliterated their memorials. He warred successfully in 
Africa, and made additions to the buildings at Karnac, Luxor, and other places. 
His reign was reckoned at thirty-seven years, B.C. 1364 to 1327. 10. A king 
called Resitot (the Rathotis of Manetho) appears to have succeeded Horus, 
and to have brought the dynasty to a close. His relationship to Horus is. 
uncertain. He reigned only a few years, B.C. 1327 to 1324. 

Kings of the Nineteenth Djmasty: — ^1. Ramesses I, founder of the 



PART II.] EGYPJ. 69 

dynasty (about B.C. 1324), derived his descent from Amos and Amunoph I, 
but not from any of the later kings. He reigned less than two years. 2. Seti, 
his son (the Sesostris of Herodotus and Diodorus, and the Sethos of Manetho), 
succeeded — a great and warlike monarch. He re-conquered Syria, which had 
revolted after the death of Amunoph HI, and contended with the Arabs, the 
Hittites, the Tahai (Dai) on the borders of Cilicia, and the people of Western 
Mesopotamia. He built the Great Hall of Karnac, and constructed for him- 
self the most beautiful of all the royal tombs. According to Manetho, he 
reigned upwards of fifty years. 3. Ramesses H (Ramessu-Miamun), who 
had for many years ruled conjointly with his father, became sole king on his 
decease. He warred in the same regions and with the same people as his 
father, and also carried his arms deep into the African continent. The chief 
of his monuments is the Ramesseum (Memnonium) at Thebes. His stele, 
engraved on the rocks at the Nahr-el-Kelb, is well known. Egyptian art 
reached its culminating point in his reign. He opened a canal from the Nile 
above Bubastis to the Red Sea, and maintained a fleet in those waters. In 
all, he reigned sixty-six years, from about B.C. 131 1 to 1245. 4. Amenephthes 
(Menephthah), his son, succeeded. He is thought by some to be the Pharaoh 
of the Exodus. The length of his reign is uncertain. He was followed by 
his son, 5. Sethos H (Seti), who was undistinguished, and had but a short 
reign. 

Kings of the Twentieth Dynasty : — Ramesses HI (perhaps the Rham- 
psinitus of Herodotus, who was famous for his full treasury) ascended the 
throne about B.C. 12 19. He was at once a great builder and a conqueror. 
He fought at sea with the Tokari (Carians ?) and the Khairetana (Cretans ?) ; 
and on land penetrated as far as Western Mesopotamia. His chief buildings, 
which are at Medinet-Habu, though they are magnificent, indicate a certain 
decHne of the arts. He was succeeded by four sons, who all bore the same 
name, Ramesses, and who were all equally undistinguished. Then came 
Ramesses VHI, the sixth king of the dynasty, who was more warlike than his 
predecessors, and made some successful foreign expeditions. Six or seven 
other kings of the same name followed, most of whom had short reigns. The 
dynasty seems to have come to an end about B.C. 1085. 

15. The decline of Egypt under the twentieth dynasty is very 
marked. We can ascribe it to nothing but internal decay — a 
decay proceeding mainly from those natural causes Decline of 
which are always at work, compelling nations and the monarchy 

1-1 • 1- • 1 1 r begins with 

races, like individuals, after they have reached twentieth 
maturity, to sink in vital force, to become de- dynasty, 
bilitated, and finally to perish. Under the nineteenth dynasty 
Egypt reached her highest pitch of greatness, internal and ex- 
ternal; under the twentieth she rapidly sank_, alike in military 
power, in artistic genius, and in taste. For a space of almost 
two centuries, from about B.C. 11 70 to 990, she scarcely under- 
took a single important enterprise; her architectural efforts 
during the whole of this time were mean, and her art without 
spirit or life. Subsequently, in the space between b. c. 990 and 
the Persian conquest, B.C. 525, she experienced one or two 
^ revivals ;' but the reaction on these occasions, being spasmodic 
and forced, exhausted rather than recruited her strength ; nor did 



70 AFRICAN NATIONS. [book i. 

the efforts made, great as they were, suffice to do more than check 
for a while the decadence which they could not avert. 

1 6. Among the special causes which produced this unusually 
rapid decline, the foremost place must be assigned to the spirit of 

Causes of caste, and particularly to the undue predominance 
the decline, of the sacerdotal order. It is true that castes^ in 
the strict sense of the word, did not exist in Egypt, since a son 
was not absolutely compelled to follow his father's profession. 
But the separation of classes was so sharply and clearly defined, 
the hereditary descent of professions was so much the rule, that 
the system closely approximated to that which has been so long 
established in India and which prevails there at the present day. 
It had^ in fact, all the evils of caste. It discouraged progress, 
advance, improvement; it repressed personal ambition; it pro- 
duced deadness, flatness, dull and tame uniformity. The priestly 
influence, which pervaded all ranks from the highest to the lowest, 
was used to maintain a conventional standard, alike in thought, 
in art, and in manners. Any tendency to deviate from the set 
forms of the old religion, that at any time showed itself, was 
sternly checked. The inclination of art to become naturalistic 
was curbed and subdued. All intercourse with foreigners, which 
might have introduced changes of manners, was forbidden. The 
aim was to maintain things at a certain set level, which was 
fixed and unalterable. But, as 'non progredi est regredi,' the 
result of repressing all advance and improvement was to bring 
about a rapid and general deterioration. 

Compare the accounts of the Egyptian castes, which are given by Hero- 
dotus, Plato, and Diodorus, with the remarks on the subject made by 
moderns. Herodotus represents the castes, or classes, as seven — ^viz. priests, 
warriors, cowherds, swineherds, tradesmen, interpreters, and boatmen ; Plato 
as six — viz. priests, warriors, shepherds, artificers, husbandmen, and hunts- 
men ; Diodorus as five — viz. priests, warriors, herdsmen, artificers, and 
husbandmen. Moderns lay it down that there were really five general 
classes — those of Diodorus — and that some of these were again subdivided, 
as is the case with some castes in India. 

17. The growing influence of the priests, which seems to have 
The twentv- ^^^^^^^ ^he later monarchs of the twentieth dynasty 
first dynasty to faineants.^ was shown Still more markedly in the 

°kmgs! ' accession to power, about b.c. T085, of the priestly 
B.C. dynasty of 'Tanites/ who occupy the twenty-first 

1085—990 

place in Manetho's list. These kings, who style 
themselves 'High-Priests of Amun,' and who wear the priestly 



PART II.] EGYPT. 71. 

costume, seem to have held their court at Tanis (Zoan), in the 
Delta, but were acknowledged for kings equally in Upper Egypt. 
It must have been to one of them that Hadad fled when Joab 
slaughtered the Edomites, and in their ranks also must be sought 
the Pharaoh who gave his daughter in marriage to Solomon. 
According to Manetho, the dynasty held the throne for rather more 
than a hundred years j but the computation is thought to be in 
excess. 

Kings of the Twenty-first Dynasty : — 1. Smendes, who reigned twenty- 
six years. 2. Psusennes (Pisham I). Reigned forty-one or forty-six years. 
3. Nephercheres. Reigned four years. 4. Amenephthes (Menephthah II). 
Reigned nine years. 5. Osochor (probably Pehor). Reigned six years. 
Left sculptures in a temple at Thebes. 6. Psinaches (Pionkh). Reigned 
nine years. 7. Psusennes II (Pisham II), his son. Left sculptures in the 
same temple as Pehor. Reigned fourteen (or thirty-five) years. 

18. With Sheshonk, the first king of the twenty-second dynasty, 

'a revival of Egyptian power to a certain extent occurred. Though 

Sheshonk himself takes the title of ' High-Priest of 

Amun,' having married the daughter of Pisham II, vival under 

the last king of the sacerdotal (twenty-first) dynasty, ^'^^^''^'^asr^'"^ 

yet beyond this no priestly character attaches to b.c. 

the monarchs of his house. Sheshonk resumes the 

practice of military expeditions, and his example is followed by 

one of the Osorkons. Monuments of some pretension are erected 

by the kings of the line, at Thebes and at Bubastis in the Delta, 

which latter is the royal city of the time. The revival, however, 

is partial and short-lived, the later monarchs of the dynasty 

being as undistinguished as any that had preceded them on the 

throne. 

Kings of the Twenty-second Dynasty :— 1. Sheshonk (the Shishak of 
Scripture, and probably the Asychis of Herodotus). Ascends the throne 
about B.C. 993, and reigns twenty-one years, B.C. 993 to 972. Receives 
Jeroboam at his court, and afterwards makes an expedition against Palestine, 
to establish Jeroboam in his kingdom. Invades Judaea, receives the sub- 
mission of Rehoboam, and plunders Jerusalem. Succeeded by his son, 
2. Osorkon I, who reigns fifteen years, from B.C. 972 to 957, and leaves the 
crown to his son, 3. Pehor, who holds it not more than a year or two, when 
he is succeeded, or superseded, by his brother-in-law, 4. Osorkon II, who 
was perhaps an Ethiopian prince, married to a daughter of Osorkon 1. This 
king is probably the Zerach of Scripture, who made an unsuccessful expe- 
dition against Asia, about B.C. 942. He reigned twenty-three years, from 
B.C. 956 to 933. 5. Sheshonk II, his son, succeeded him; after whom the 
crown passed to a 'prince of the Mashoash,' 6. Takelot I, who was married 
to Keromama, a granddaughter of the third king, Pehor. He reigned (pro- 
bably) twenty-three years, when he was succeeded by his son, 7. Osorkon III, 
who reigned at least twenty-eight years. He left the crown to his son, 8. She- 
shonk III, who also reigned as much as twenty-eight or twenty-nine years. 



72 AFRICAN NATIONS. [book i. 

The dynasty ended with 9. Takelot II, son of Sheshonk III, the length of 
whose reign is quite uncertain. The probable duration of the dynasty was 
146 years, B.C. 993 to 847. 

39. The decline of the monarchy advanced now with rapid 
strides. On the death of Takelot II, a disintegration of the king- 
Further dom seems to have taken place. While the Bubas- 
decline. ^j^g ijjjg -^^s carried on in a third Pisham (or Pishai) 

Twenty-third , , ,. \^ , / 

and parallel and a fourth Sheshonk, a rival Ime, Manetho s 
^^B^c^^^' twenty-third dynasty, sprang up at Tanis, and ob- 
847-758. tained the chief power. The kings of this line, 
who are four in number, are wholly undistinguished. 

Kings of the Twenty-third Dynasty: — 1. Petubastes (Pet-su-Pasht). 
Reigned forty years. 2. Osorko (Osorkon IV). Reigned eight years. 
3. Psammus (Pse-mut). Reigned ten years. 4. Zet (probably Seti III). 
(Reigned thirty-one years. Duration of the dynasty, eighty-nine years, from 
B.C. 847 to 758. 

30. A transfer of the seat of empire to Sais^ another city of the 

Delta, now took place. A king, whom Manetho 
The '. ^ °' 

twenty-fourth and Dlodorus call Bocchoris (perhaps Pehor) ascended 

J. T'^^r.u the throne. This monarch, after he had reigned 

twenty-fifth ' ° 

dynasties, forty-four years — either as an independent prince or 
conquered by ^^ ^ tributary to Ethiopia — was put to death by 
Ethiopia, about Sabaco, an Ethiopian, who conquered Egypt and 
founded the twenty-fifth dynasty. 

Kings of the Twenty-fifth Dynasty : — 1. Sabaco I (Shebek I), the So 
or Seveh of Scripture. His treaty with Hoshea, the last king of Israel, must 
have been made about B.C. 724. Its conclusion shows that the encroachments 
of Assyria had begun to cause alarm. The first hostile contact between 
Assyria and Egypt occurred in his reign. Sargon, who was his adversary, 
defeated his troops, and made himself master of Philistia, about B.C. 719. 
2. Sabaco II, the Sevechus of Manetho, succeeded, about B.C. 704. His 
reign of fourteen years terminated B.C. 690, when the third and greatest of 
the Ethiopian monarchs mounted the throne. This was 3. Tehrak — the 
Tirhakah of the Jews, and the Tarcus, Taracus, or Tearchon of the Greek 
writers— who contended successively with Sennacherib, Esarhaddon, and 
Asshur-bani-pal. Discomfiture of Sennacherib, about B.C. 698. Esarhaddon 
invades Lower Egypt, about B.C. 669, and breaks it up into a number of small 
kingdoms. Tirhakah re-establishes his authority, B.C. 668. Asshur-bani-pal, 
having succeeded, contends with Tirhakah for two years. Tirhakah is 
defeated and abdicates in favour of his son, who is driven out. Egypt is 
then once more broken up into petty kingdoms (compare the dodecarchy of 
Herodotus), and remains subject to Assyria, probably till the death of Asshur- 
bani-pal, about B.C. 647. Nechoh, the father of Psammetichus, is among the 
viceroys whom Asshur-bani-pal sets up. 

31. Thus it appears that between b.c. 730 and 66^ Egypt was 
conquered twice — first by the Ethiopians, and then, within about 



PART II.] EGYPT. 73 

sixty years, by the Assyrians. The native Egyptian army had 
grown to be weak and contemptible, from a prac- 
tice, which sprang up under the Sheshonks, of conquest of 
employing mainly foreign troops in military ex- '^^■*«i'c 
peditions. There was also (as has been observed 
already) a general decline of the national spirit, which made 
submission to a foreign yoke less galling than it would have 
been at an earlier date. 

22. It is difficult to say at what exact time the yoke of Assyria 
was thrown off. Psammetichus (Psamatik I), who seems to have 

succeeded his father, Nechoh, or to have been asso- 

, , , . , . 1.1 r 1 • r-k. T Re-establish- 

ciated by him, almost immediately after his (Ne- ment of 

choh-'s) establishment as viceroy by Asshur-bani-pal, . Egyptian 

' ■' •' ^ ' independence 

counted his reign from the abdication of Tirhakah, under the 
as if he had from that time been independent and (s^tT)'^dynasty 
sole king. But there can be little doubt that in about 

B C 630 

reality for several years he was merely one of many 
rulers, all equally subject to the great monarch of Assyria. The 
revolt, which he headed, may have happened in the reign of Asshur- 
bani-pal ; but, more probably^ it fell in that of his successor. Per- 
haps its true cause was the shattering of Assyrian power by the 
invasion of the Scyths, about B.C. 632. Psammetichus, by the aid 
of Greek mercenaries, and (apparently) after some opposition from 
his brother viceroys, made himself independent and established his 
dominion over the whole of Egypt. Native rule was thus restored 
after nearly a century of foreign domination. 

Kings of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty :— 1. Psammetichus (Psamatik I). 
Married an Ethiopian princess. Settled the Greek mercenaries in permanent 
camps near Bubastis. Ofl'ended the warrior caste, which deserted in great 
numbers to the Ethiopians. Encouraged art and constructed several great 
works. Besieged and took Ashdod. Bribed the Scythians to retire from 
Palestine without attacking Egypt. "Was of an inquiring turn of mind, and 
tried many curious experiments. Reigned iifty-four years in all, from B.C. 664 
to 610 ; but was probably not an independent monarch for more than twenty 
or thirty years. 2. Nechoh, his son. Reigned sixteen years, from B.C. 610 to 
594. Applied himself to naval and commercial matters. IBuilt fleets in the 
Red Sea and the Mediterranean. Attempted to re-open the canal between 
the Red Sea and the Nile. Had Africa circumnavigated. Invaded Syria in 
his second year, B.C. 609; defeated Josiah at Megiddo, and conquered the 
whole tract between Egypt and Carchemish on the Euphrates. Attacked by 
Nebuchadnezzar, B.C. 605 ; was defeated and forced to yield all his conquests. 
3. Psammis (Psamatik II), his son. Reigned only six years, from B.C. 594 to 
588. Made an expedition into Ethiopia. 4. Apries (the Uaphris of Manetho, 
and the Pharaoh-Hophra of Scripture), his son. Reigned nineteen years, from 
B.C. 588 to 569. Resumed the aggressive policy of his grandfather. Besieged 
Sidon, and fought a naval battle with Tyre. Assisted Zedekiah against 



74 AFRICAN NATIONS. [book i. 

Nebuchadnezzar, but ineffectually. Made an expedition against Gyrene, 
which ended ill. Deposed, either by a revolt on the part of his own subjects, 
or more probably by Nebuchadnezzar, B.C. 569. Succeeded by 5. Amasis 
(Ames or Aahmes), who probably held his crown at first under the Babylonian 
monarch. Having strengthened himself by marrying a niece of the late king, 
daughter of his sister, Nitocris, he after a while made himself independent. 
He adorned Sais with grand buildings, and left monuments in all parts of the 
country. He encouraged Greek merchants to settle in Egypt, and was on 
friendly terms with Gyrene and other Greek States. The only expedition 
which he undertook was one against Gyprus, which submitted and became 
tributary. Fearing the growing power of Persia, he allied himself with 
Croesus of Lydia and Polycrates of Samos ; but nothing was gained by these 
prudential measures. After the death of Cyrus, Cambyses, his son, collected 
a great expedition against Egypt, and had probably commenced his march 
when Amasis died, having reigned forty-four years. The task of resisting this 
attack fell on his son, 6. Psammenitus (Psamatik HI), who met Cambyses 

near Pelusium, but was defeated and compelled to shut him- 

■"^SyP^ self up in his capital, Memphis, which was shortly besieged 

conquered by ^^^ taken. Psammenitus was made prisoner after he had 

B^c^ 525 ' reigned six months, and soon afterwards, being suspected of 

an intention to revolt, was put to death, B.C. 525. Thus 
perished the Egyptian monarchy, after it had lasted, as a single united kingdom, 
for a thousand years. 

23. The revolts of Egypt from Persia will necessarily come 
under consideration in the section on the Achaemenian Monarchy. 
Egypt was the most disaffected of all the Persian 
B.C. provinces and was always striving after indepen- 

dence. Her antagonism to Persia seems to have 
been less political than polemical. It was no doubt fermented by 
the priests. On two occasions independence was so far achieved 
that native rulers were set up ; and Manetho counts three native 
dynasties as interrupting the regular succession of the Persians. 
These form the twenty-eighth, the twenty-ninth, and the thirtieth 
of his series. The first of these consists of one king only, 
Amyrtaeus, who revolted in conjunction with Inarus, and reigned 
from B.C. 460 to 455. The other two dynasties are consecutive, 
B c and cover the space from the revolt in the reign of 

405-346. Darius Nothus (b.c. 405) to the re-conquest under 
Ochus (B.C. 346). 

Kings of the Twenty-ninth (Mendesian) Dynasty:—!. Neferites 
(Nefaorot). Reigned six years, B.C. 405 to 399. 2. Achoris (Hakar). 
Reigned thirteen years, B.C. 399 to 386. 3. Psammuthis. Reigned one year, 
B.C. 386 to 385. 4. Nepherites H. Reigned four months, B.C. 384. 

Kings of the Thirtieth (Sebennjrtie) Dynasty:—!. Nectanebo I (Necht- 
nebef). Reigned eighteen years, B.C. 384 to 366. 2. Teos or Tachos. 
Reigned two years, B.C. 366 to 364. 3. Nectanebo H (Necht-nebef). Reigned 
eighteen years, B.C. 364 to 346. 



PAKT II.] CARTHAGE. 75 



B. History of Carthage from its Foundation to the 
Commenceme^tt of the Wars with Rome. 

Sources. It is unfortunate that we possess no native accounts of the 
History of Carthage. Native histories existed at the time of the Roman con- 
quest, and were seen by Sallust ; but no translation was made of them into 
the tongue of the conqueror. The Carthaginian inscriptions which modern 
research has discovered are in no instance historical. We have not even any 
description by a Greek or Latin writer of the general character or contents 
of the native histories. Nor is the deiiciency of native records compensated 
by any exact or copious accounts from the pens of foreigners. Herodotus, 
who gives us monographs on the histories of so many ancient nations, is almost 
wholly silent about Carthage. Timaeus, Ephorus, and Theopompus, the 
earliest Greek authors who treated of Carthaginian affairs at any length, were 
writers of poor judgment ; and of their works, moreover, we have nothing but 
a few fragments. The earhest and most important notice of Carthage which 
has come down to us is Aristotle's account of the form of government (Pol. 
ii. 11). From this most valuable passage, combined with scattered notices 
in other writers, the constitutional history of the great commercial republic 
may be to some extent reconstructed. For the general course of her civil 
history, for her foundation and her earlier wars and conquests, we must have 
recourse to Justin, Diodorus, and Polybius. The later wars are treated at 
some length, but from a Roman point of view, by Polybius, Livy, and Appian. 
Herodotus has some important notices connected with the trade of the Car- 
thaginians, on which further light is thrown by two translations of Carthaginian 
works, which are still extant. These are : — 

Hanno, Periplus, in C. MiJLLER's Geographi Graci Minores. Paris, 1855 ; 
and ed. Falconer. London, 1797. 

Festus Avienus, Ora Maritima (i. 80-130; iv. 375-412), in HUDSON'S 
Geographi Minores, vol. iv. Oxford, 1698. 

Modern works touching on the history of Carthage are the following : — 

BoTTICHER, Geschichte der Cart hagernach den Quellen, 8vo. Berlin, 1827. 

Heeren, Ideen ilber die Politik, &c., vol. iv. Translated into English, and 
published at Oxford by Talboys, 1832. 

Davis, Dr. N., Carthage and her Remains. London, 1861. Containing an 
account of excavations on the site of Carthage made in the years 1857 
and 1858. 

The history of Carthage may be conveniently divided into three 
periods — the first extending from the foundation of the city to the 
commencement of the wars with Syracuse, B.C. 850 to 480; the 
next from the first attack on Syracuse to the breaking out of war 
with Rome, B.C. 480 to 264 j and the third from the commence- 
ment of the Roman wars to their termination by the destruction 
of Carthage, B.C. 264 to 146. In the present place, only the first 
and second of these periods will be considered. 



76 AFRICAN NATIONS. [book i. 

PIEST PERIOD. 

From the foundation of Carthage to the commencement of the Wars 
with Syracuse, from about B.C. 850 to 480. 

1. The foundation of Carthage, which was mentioned in the 
Tyrian histories, belonged to the time of Pygmalion, the son of 

Matgen, who seems to have reigned from about 
of*Carthage ^.c. 87 T to 824. The colony appears to have taken 
and position its rise, not from the mere commercial spirit in 

of the city. ,.,,_,. , , 

which other Tyrian settlements on the same coast 
had originated, but from political differences. Still, its rela- 
tions with the mother city were, from first to last, friendly; 
though the bonds of union were under the Phoenician system of 
colonisation even weaker and looser than under the Greek. The 
site chosen for the settlement was a peninsula, projecting east- 
ward into the Gulf of Tunis, and connected with the mainland 
towards the west by an isthmus about ' three miles across. Here 
were some excellent land-locked harbours, a position easily de- 
fensible, and a soil which was fairly fertile. The settlement was 
made with the good-will of the natives, who understood the bene- 
fits of commerce, and gladly let to the new-comers a portion of 
their soil at a fixed rent. For many years the place must have 
been one of small importance, little (if at all) superior to Utica 
or Hadrumetum j but by degrees an advance was made, and within 
a century or two from the date of her foundation, Carthage had 
become a considerable power, had shot ahead of all the other 
Phoenician settlements in these parts, and had acquired a large 
and valuable dominion. 

2. The steps of the advance are somewhat difficult to trace. 
It would seem, however, that, unlike the other Phoenician colonies, 

Rapid and unlike the Phoenician cities of the Asiatic 
advance. mainland themselves, Carthage aimed from the first 
at uniting a land with a sea dominion. The native tribes in the 
neighbourhood of the city, originally nomades, were early won 
to agricultural occupations; Carthaginian colonies were thickly 
planted among them; inter-marriages between the colonists and 
the native races were encouraged ; and a mixed people grew up 
in the fertile territory south and south-west of Carthage, known 
as Liby-Phoenices, who adopted the language and habits of the 
immigrants, and readily took up the position of faithful and 



PARTiL] CARTHAGE. 77 

attached subjects. Beyond the range of territory thus occupied, 
Carthaginian influence was further extended over a large number 
of pure African tribes, of whom some applied themselves to agri- 
culture, while the majority preserved their old nomadic mode of 
life. These tribes, like the Arabs in the modern Algeria^ were 
held in a loose and almost nominal subjection; but still were 
reckoned as, in a certain sense, Carthaginian subjects, and no 
doubt contributed to the resources of the empire. The proper 
territory of Carthage was regarded as extending southward as far 
as the Lake Triton, and westward to the river Tusca, which 
divided Zeugitana from Numidia, thus nearly coinciding with the 
modern Beylik of Tunis. 

3. But these limits were far from contenting the ambition of 
the Carthaginians. From the compact and valuable territory 
above described, they proceeded to bring within the e t t f 
scope of their influence the tracts which lay beyond the land 

it eastward and westward. The authority of Car- po^er. 
thage came gradually to be acknowledged by all the coast-tribes 
between the Tusca and the Pillars of Hercules, as well as by the 
various nomad races between Lake Triton and the territory of 
Cyrene. In the former tract numerous settlements were made, 
and a right of marching troops along the shore was claimed and 
exercised. From the latter only commercial advantages were 
derived; but these were probably of considerable importance. 

4. In considering the position of the Carthaginians in Africa, it 
must not be forgotten that the Phoenicians had founded numerous 
settlements on the African mainland, and that 

Carthage was only the most powerful of these colo- ^ith other 

nies. Utica, Hadrumetum, Leptis Magna, and other Phoenician 
^ 11 colonies. 

places, were at the first independent communities 

over which Carthage had no more right to exercise authority than 

they had over her. The dominion of Carthage seems to have 

been by degrees extended over these places; but to the last 

some of them, more especially Utica, retained a certain degree 

of independence ; and, so far as these settlements are concerned, 

we must view Carthage rather as the head of a confederacy than as 

a single centralised power. Her confederates were too weak to 

resist her or to exercise much check upon her policy ; but she had 

the disadvantage of being less than absolute mistress of many 

places lying within her territory. 



78 AFRICAN NATIONS. [book i. 

5. But the want of complete unity at home did not prevent her 
from aspiring after an extensive foreign dominion. Her influence 

„ , . was established in Western Sicily at an early date. 

Colonies •' . ^ -* 

in the and superseded in that region the still more ancient 
IS, an s. influence of Phoenicia. Sardinia was conquered after 
long and bloody wars towards the close of the sixth century B.C. 
The Balearic islands, Majorca, Minorca, and Ivica, seem to have 
been occupied even earlier. At a later time, settlements were 
made in Corsica and Spain ; while the smaller islands, both of 
the Mediterranean and the Atlantic, Madeira, the Canaries, Malta, 
Gaulos (Gozo), and Cercina, were easily subjugated. By the close 
of the sixth century, Carthaginian power extended from the greater 
Syrtis to the Fortunate Islands, and from Corsica to the flanks of 
Atlas. 

6. To eflFect her conquests, the great trading city had, almost of 
necessity, recourse to mercenaries. Mercenaries had been em- 
Land force of ployed by the Egyptian mo'narchs as early as the time 
mercenaries, of Psammetichus (B.C. 664), and Were known to 

Homer about two centuries previously. Besides the nucleus of 
a disciplined force which Carthage obtained from her own native 
citizens and from the mixed race of Liby-Phoenices, and besides 
the irregulars which she drew from her other subjects, it was her 
practice to maintain large bodies of hired troops (iJna9o(}>6povs), de- 
rived partly from the independent African nations, such as the 
Numidians and the Mauritanians, partly from the warlike European 
races with which her foreign trade brought her into contact— 
the Iberians of Spain, the Celts of Gaul, and the Ligurians of 
Northern Italy. The first evidence that we have of the existence 
of this practice belongs to the year b.c. 480; but there is sufficient 
reason to believe that it commenced considerably earlier. 

7. The naval power of Carthage must have dated from the 
foundation of the city j for, as the sea in ancient times swarmed 

with pirates, an extensive commerce required and 
implies the possession of a powerful navy. For 
several centuries the great Phoenician settlement must have been 
almost undisputed mistress of the Western and Central Mediter- 
ranean, the only approach to a rival being Tyrrhenia, which was, 
however, decidedly inferior. The officers ar^d sailors in the fleets 
were mostly native Carthaginians, while the rowers were mainly 
slaves, whom the State bred or bought for the purpose. 



PAETii.] CARTHAGE. 79 

8. Towards the middle of the sixth century b. c, the jealousy of 
the Carthaginians was aroused by the intrusion into waters, which 
they regarded as their own, of Greek commerce. 

The enterprising Phocseans opened a trade with rivalry be- 
Tartessus, founded Massilia near the mouth of the tween the 

Cartlia,- 

Rhone, and sought to establish themselves in Corsica ginians 
in force. Hereupon Carthage, assisted by Tyrrhenia, ^*^ ^^® 
destroyed the Phocsean fleet, about B.C. 550. Soon 
afterwards quarrels arose in Sicily between the Carthaginians and 
the Greek settlements there, provoked apparently by the latter. 
About the same time Rome, under the second Tarquin, became 
a flourishing kingdom, and a naval power of some consequence ; 
and Carthage, accustomed to maintain friendly relations with the 
Italians, concluded a treaty with the rising State, about B.C. 508. 

9. The constitution of Carthage, like that of most other great 
trading communities, was undoubtedly aristocratic. The native 
element, located at Carthage, or in the immediate Constitution 
neighbourhood, was the sole depository of political of Carthage. 
power, and governed at its will all the rest of the empire. Within 
this native element itself the chief distinction, which divided class 
from class, was that of wealth. The two Suffetes indeed, who 
stood in a certain sense at the head of the State, seem to have 
been chosen only from certain families j but otherwise all native 
Carthaginians were eligible to all offices. Practically what threw 
power into the hands of the rich was the fact that no office was 
salaried, and that thus the poor man could not afford to hold 
office. Public opinion was also strongly in favour of the rich. 
Candidates for power were expected to expend large sums of 
money, if not in actual bribery, yet at any rate in treating on 
the most extensive scale. Thus office, and with it power, became 
the heritage of a certain knot of peculiarly wealthy families. 

10. At the head of the State were two Suffetes, or Judges, who 
in the early times were Captains-General as well as chief civil 
magistrates, but whose office gradually came to be 'j-j^g Suffetes, 
regarded as civil only and not military. These Council, 

1 1.1 • • r ■ r •^• ^"d Senate 

were elected by the citizens from certain families, of One 
probably for life. The next power in the State Hundred, 
was the Council (o-yy/cAjjro?), a body consisting of several hun- 
dreds, from which were appointed, directly or indirectly, almost 
all the other officers of the government — as the Senate of One 



8o AFRICAN NATIONS. [book i. 

Hundred {yepovaia), a Select Committee of the Council which 
directed all its proceedings ; and the Pentarchies^ Commissions of 
Five Members each, which managed the various departments of 
State, and filled up vacancies in the Senate. The Council of One 
Hundred (or, with the two SufFetes and the two High-Priests, 104) 
Judges, a High Court of Judicature elected by the people^ was the 
most popular element in the Constitution j but even its members 
The Council Were practically chosen from the upper classes^ and 
Hundred their power was used rather to check the excessive 
and Four. ambition of individual members of the aristocracy 
than to augment the civil rights or improve the social condition 
of the people. The people, however, were contented. They 
elected the SufFetes under certain restrictions^ and the Generals 
freely; they probably filled up vacancies in the Great Council; 
and in cases where the SufFetes and the Council differed, they 
discussed and determined political measures. Questions of peace 
and war^ treaties, and the like, were frequently, though not neces- 
sarily, brought before them ; and the aristocratical character of 
the Constitution was maintained by the weight of popular opinion, 
which was in favour of power resting with the rich. Through the 
openings which trade gave to enterprise any one might become 
rich y and extreme poverty was almost unknown, since no sooner 
did it appear than it was relieved by the planting of colonies and 
the allotment of waste lands to all who applied for them. 

11. As the power of Carthage depended mainly on her main- 
tenance of huge armies of mercenaries, it was a necessity of her 

position that she should have a large and secure 
revenue. This she drew, in part from State property, 
particularly mines, in Spain and elsewhere ; in part from tribute, 
which was paid alike by the federate cities (Utica, Hadrumetum, 
&c.), by the Liby-Phoenices, by the dependent African nomades, 
and by the provinces (Sardinia, Sicily, &c.) ; and in part from 
customs, which were exacted rigorously through all her dominions. 
The most elastic of these sources of revenue was the tribute, 
which was augmented or diminished as her needs required; and 
which is said to have amounted sometimes to as much as fifty 
per cent, on the income of those subject to it. 

12. The extent of Carthaginian commerce is uncertain; but 
Commerce, there can be little doubt that it reached, at any 

rate, to the following places : in the north, Cornwall and the 



PART II.] CARTHAGE. 8i 

Scilly Islands j in the east, Phoenicia; towards the west, Madeira, 
the CanarieSj and the coast of Guinea ; towards the south, Fezzan. 
It was chiefly a trade by which Carthage obtained the commodities 
that she needed, wine, oil^ dates, salt fish, silphium, gold, tin, lead^ 
salt, ivory, precious stones, and slaves, exchanging against them 
her own manufactures, textile fabrics, hardware, pottery, orna- 
ments for the person, harness for horses, tools, &c. But it was 
also to a considerable extent a carrying trade, whereby Carthage 
enabled the nations of Western Europe, Western Asia, and the 
interior of Africa to obtain respectively each other's products. It 
was in part a land, in part a sea traffic. While the Carthaginian 
merchants scoured the seas in all directions in their trading vessels, 
caravans directed by Carthaginian enterprise penetrated the Great 
Desert, and brought to Carthage from the south and the south-east 
the products of those far-off regions. Upper Egypt, Cyrene, the 
oases of the Sahara, Fezzan, perhaps Ethiopia and Bornou, carried 
on in this way a traffic with the great commercial emporium. 
By sea her commerce was especially with Tyre, with her own 
colonies, with the nations of the Western Mediterranean, with 
the tribes of the African coast from the Pillars of Hercules to the 
Bight of Benin, and with the remote barbarians of South-Western 
Albion. 

SECOND PERIOD. 

From the commencement of the Wars with Syracuse to the breaking out of 
the first War with Ro?ne, B.C. 480 to 264. 

I. The desire of the Carthaginians to obtain complete posses- 
sion of Sicily is in no way strange or surprising. Their prestige 
rested mainly on their maritime supremacy; and 
this supremacy was open to question, so long as the Carthage 
large island which lay closest to them and most "p^^t mS' 
directly opposite to their shores was mainly, or even invasion, 
toanygreatextent, under the influence of aliens. The 
settlement of the Greeks in Sicily, about e.g. 750 to 700, preceded 
the rise of the Carthaginians to greatness ; and it must have been 
among the earliest objects of ambition of the last-named people, 
after they became powerful, to drive the Hellenes from the island. 
It would seem, however, that no great expedition had been made 
prior to b.c. 480. Till then Carthage had been content to hold 
the western corner of the island only, and to repulse intruders 

G 



82 AFRICAN NATIONS. [book i. 

into that region, like Dorieus. But in B.C. 480, when the expe- 
dition of Xerxes gave full occupation to the bulk of the Greek 
nation, Carthage conceived that the time was come at which she 
might expect to attack the Greeks of Sicily with success, and to 
conquer them before they could receive succours from the mother 
country. Accordingly, a vast army was collected, and under Hamil- 
car^ son of Mago, a great attack was made. But the victory of 
Gelo at Himera completely frustrated the expedition. Hamilcar 
fell or slew himself. The invading army was withdrawn, and 
Carthage consented to conclude an ignominious peace. 

2. The check thus received induced the Carthaginians to 
suspend for a while their designs against the coveted island. 

Extension of Attention was turned to the consolidation of their 
the Cartha- African power : and under Hannibal, Hasdrubal, and 

giman domi- ^ ' ^ 

nion in Sappho, grandsons of Mago and nephews of Hamilcar, 
b"c^' ^^^ native Libyan tribes were reduced to more com- 
480-409. plete dependence, and Carthage was released from 
a tribute which she had hitherto paid as an acknowledgment that 
the site on which she stood was Libyan ground. A contest was 
also carried on with the Greek settlement of Cyr^ne, which ter- 
minated to the advantage of Carthage. Anticipated danger from 
the excessive influence of the family of Mago was guarded against 
by the creation of the Great Council of Judges, before whom every 
general had to appear on his return from an expedition. 

3. It was seventy years after their first ignominious failure 
when the Carthaginians once more invaded Sicily in force. In- 
Second in- vited by Egesta to assist her against Selinus, they 
^^SicU crossed over with a vast fleet and army, under the 
B. c. 409. command of Hannibal, the grandson of Hamilcar, 

B.C. 409, destroyed Selinus and Himera, defeated the Greeks in 
several battles, and returned home in triumph. This first success 
was followed by wars (i) with Dionysius I, tyrant of Syracuse ; 
(2) with Dionysius II and Timoleon ; and (3) with Agathocles. 

War with Dionysius I, B.C. 405 to 368. Invasion of Sicily by Hannibal 
and Himilco. Capture of Agrigentum, Gela, and Camarina. Convention 
with Dionysius, B.C. 405. Convention broken by Dionysius, B.C. 397. His 
triumphant march. Camarina, Gela, Agrigentum, and Selinus recovered. 
Motya taken. Landing of Himilco, B.C. 396. Motya recovered. Messene 
taken. Victory of Mago off Catana. Siege of Syracuse. Pestilence, B.C. 395. 
Flight of Himilco and destruction of his deserted army. His suicide. Mago 
sent to Sicily, B.C. 393. Peace made the year following. Attempt of Dio- 
nysius to expel the Carthaginians from Sicily, B.C. 383, fails by his defeat at 



PART iL] CARTHAGE. 83 

Cronium, B.C. 382. Peace made on terms favourable to Carthage. Renewed 
attempt of Dionysius, B.C. 368, again fails. 

War with Dionysius II, B.C. 346 to 340. Attempt of Carthage to take 
advantage of internal troubles at Syracuse after the death of Dion. Arrange- 
ment made with Hicetas. Danger of Syracuse. Timoleon sent from Corinth 
to its relief. Mago and Hicetas besiege Syracuse, B.C. 344. Distrust of the 
former; he suddenly retires. Timoleon attacks the Carthaginian towns, B.C. 
341. Great armament sent from Carthage under Hasdrubal and Hamilcar 
defeated by Timoleon at the Crimesus, B.C. 340. Another army sent under 
Cisco. Peace made on the old terms. 

War with Agathocles, B.C. 311 to 304. War begun by aggressions of 
Agathocles on Agrigentum. Victory of Hamilcar at the Himera, B.C. 310, 
followed by the siege of Syracuse. Resolution of Agathocles to transfer the 
war ii.to Africa. He lands and burns his ships ; is for some time successful, 
partly owing to the treachery of Bomilcar, but cannot conquer Carthage. 
His son, twice defeated during his absence in Africa, B.C. 305. On his return, 
he too is defeated, and flies. Peace made, B.C. 304. 

4. The result of these wars was not, on the whole, encouraging. 

At the cost of several hundreds of thousands of men, of large 

fleets, and of an immense treasure, Carthage had „ , ^ 

' 30 Result of 

succeeded in maintaining possession of about one- the Sicilian 
third of Sicily, but had not advanced her boun- ^^'^^' 
dary by a single mile. Her armies had generally been defeated, 
if they engaged their enemy upon anything like even terms. 
She had found her generals decidedly inferior to those of the 
Greeks. Above all, she had learnt that she was vulnerable at 
home — that descents might be made on her own shores, and that 
her African subjects were not to be depended on. Still, she did 
not relinquish her object. After the death of Agathocles in B.C. 
289, the Hellenic power in Sicily rapidly declined. The Mamer- 
tines seized Messanaj and Carthage, resuming an aggressive 
attitude, seemed on the point of obtaining all her desires. Agri- 
gentum was once more taken, all the southern part of the island 
occupied, and Syracuse itself threatened. But the landing of 
Pyrrhus at the invitation of Syracuse saved the city, and turned 
the fortune of war against Carthage, b.c. 279. His flight, two 
years later, did not restore matters to their former condition. 
Carthage had contracted obligations towards Syracuse in the war 
against Pyrrhus j and, moreover^ a new contest was evidently im- 
pending. The great aggressive power of the West, Rome, was 
about to appear upon the scene; and, to resist her, Carthage 
required the friendly co-operation of the Greeks. A treaty was 
consequently made with Hiero ; and Carthage paused, biding her 
time, and still hoping at no distant period to extend her domina- 
tion over the entire island. 

G 2 



BOOK II. 



HISTORY OF PERSIA FROM THE ACCESSION OF CYRUS 
TO THE DESTRUCTION OF THE EMPIRE BY ALEXANDER, 
FROM B.C. 558 TO 330. 



Sources. First in importance (so far as they extend) are the native 
sources, consisting chiefly of inscriptions on rocks and buildings, which have 
been deciphered by the labours of Grotefend, Lassen, Burnouf, Westergaard, 
and Sir H. Ravs^linson. These inscriptions cover the period from Cyrus, 
B.C. 550, to Artaxerxes Ochus, B.C. 350, but are unfortunately scanty, excepting 
for the space of about seven years, from the death of Cambyses to the full 
establishment of Darius I in his kingdom. Among works on the inscriptions 
are the following : — 

Ravs^LINSON, Sir H., The Persian Cuneiform Inscription at Behistun deciphered 
and translated, with plates representing the exact condition of the original. 
Published in the Journal of the Asiatic Society, vol. x. (London, 1846-7), 
and followed by Copies and Translations of the Persian Cuneiform Inscriptions of 
Persepolis, Hamadan, and Van. 

Lassen, Prof., Die Jlt-Persischen Keilinschriften 'von Persepolis, published in 
the Zeitschrift fur die Kunde des Morgenlandes , vol. vi. Bonn, 1836, 

Burnouf, Memoire sur deux Inscriptions Cuneiformes, trowvees pres dUiamadan. 
Paris, 1836. 

Spiegel, Die Altpersischen Keilinschriften, 8vo. ; Leipzig, 1862. A transcript 
of the inscriptions in Roman characters, with a translation, a brief comment, 
and a valuable vocabulary. 

Another valuable but scanty source of ancient Persian history consists of 
the Jewish Mrriters, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, and the anonymous author of 
Esther, who were contemporary with Persian kings, and lived under their 
sway. The book of Esther is especially important from the graphic repre- 
sentation which it gives us of the Persian court, and the habits and mode 
of life of the king. 

We should possess, however, but a very slight knowledge of the history of 
Ancient Persia were it not for the labours of the Greeks. Four Greek writers 
especially devoted a large share of their attention to the subject ; and of these 
two remain to us entire, of the third we possess by far the greater portion, 
while the fourth exists only in an epitome. These writers are {a) Herodotus, 
who traces the history of the empire from its foundation to the year B.C. 479. 
His work is valuable, as he had travelled in Persia, and derived much of his 
information from Persian informants. But these informants were not always 



PERSIA. 85 

trustworthy. (^) Ctesias : he wrote a history of Persia from the accession 
of Cyrus to B.C. 398, and professed to have drawn the greater portion of his 
narrative from the Persian archives. But strong suspicions rest upon his good 
faith. His work is lost, and our knowledge of it rests almost entirely on an 
epitome made by the Patriarch Photius, about a.d. 880. (c) Xenophon: his 
Cyropadia is a historical romance, on which a judicious criticism will place very 
slight reliance ; but his Anabasis and Hellenica are of great value for the 
period and events of which they treat. (^) DiODORUS : his Uni'versal History 
is the chief authority that we possess for the later Persian history, from 
Cunaxa to the expedition of Alexander. Other Greek writers who throw 
a light on portions of the history are — Thucydides, for the period between 
B.C. 479 and 410; Plutarch, Vitce Cimonis, Artaxerxis, et Alexandri • and 
Arrian, Expeditio Alexandri Magni, for the closing struggle, B.C. 334 to 330. 
Something may be gathered from the Latin writers, Justin and Q. CuRTius ; 
but the latter, where he differs from Arrian, is untrustworthy. 

The best modern works on Persian History are the following : — 

Brisson, De regio Persarum principatu. Paris, 1590. A valuable com- 
pilation. 

Heeren, Ideen, &c., vol. i. (see p. 6). 

Rawlinson, G., Five Great Monarchies, vol. iv. (see p. 6). 

Different opinions have been entertained as to the value of the modern 
Persian writers on the antiquities of their country. Some have seen in 
the poem of Firdausi (the Sbahnameh') and in the Chronicle of MiRKHOND, 
genuine history, a little embellished by romantic colouring and supernatural 
detail. But the best critics incline to regard the writings in question as 
pure romance, the events related as fictitious, and the personages as chiefly 
mythological. 

I. The Persians appear to have formed a part of a great Arian 
migration from the countries about the Oxus, which began at 
a very remote time, but was not completed till about origin of the 
B.C. 650. The line of migration was first westward, Persians. 
along the Elburz range into Armenia and Azerbijan, then south 
along Zagros, and finally south-east into Persia Proper. The 
chief who first set up an Arian monarchy in this last-named 
region seems to have been a certain Achaemenes (Hakhamanish), 
who probably ascended the throne about a century before Cyrus. 

3. The nation was composed of two classes of persons — the 

settled population, which lived in towns or villages, for the most 

part cultivating the soil, and the pastoral tribes. 

Tribes, 
whose habits were nomadic. The latter consisted 

of four distinct tribes — the Dai, the Mardi, the Dropici or 

Derbices, and the Sagartii; while the former comprised the six 

divisions of the Pasargadse, the Maraphii, the Maspii, the Pan- 

thialsei, the Derusisei, and the Germanii or Carmanians. Of these, 

the first three were superior; and a very marked precedency or 

pre-eminency attached to the Pasargadse. They formed a species 

of nobility, holding almost all the high offices both in the army 



86 PERSIA. [BOOK II. 

and at the court. The royal family of the Achaemenidse, or 
descendants of Achaemenes, belonged to this leading tribe. 

3. A line of native Persian kings held the throne from Achae- 
menes to Cyrus • but the sovereignty which they possessed was 

Relations not, at any rate in the times immediately preceding 
of subjection (^yj-yg^ ^n independent dominion. Relations of a 
Media. feudal character bound Persia to Media; and the 
Achsemenian princes, either from the first, or certainly from some 
time before Cyrus rebelled, acknowledged the Median monarch 
for their suzerain. Cyrus lived as a sort of hostage at the court 
of Astyages, and could not leave it without permission. Cam- 
byses, his father, had the royal title, and, practically, governed 
Persia; but he was subject to Astyages, and probably paid him 
an annual tribute. 

4. The revolt of the Persians was not the consequence of their 
suffering any grievous oppression; nor, did it even arise from any 

Causes of the wide-spread discontent or dissatisfaction with their 
revolt. condition. Its main cause was the ambition of Cyrus. 
That prince had seen, as he grew up at Ecbatana, that the 
strength of the Medes was undermined by luxury, that their old 
warlike habits were laid aside, and that, in all the qualities 
which make the soldier, they were no match for his own country- 
men. He had learned to despise the faineant monarch who 

occupied the Median throne. It occurred to him 
Its success ^ 

and conse- that it would be easy to make Persia an inde- 
quences. pendent power; and this was probably all that he 
at first contemplated. But the fatal persistence of the Median 
monarch in attempts to reduce the rebels, and his capture in the 
second battle of Pasargadae, opened the way to greater changes; 
and the Persian prince, rising to a level with the occasion, 
pushed his own country into the imperial position from which the 
success of his revolt had dislodged the Medes. 

Submission of the subjects of the Medes to Cyrus, B.C. 558. Rapid series 
of conquests. Defeat of Croesus in Cappadocia and capture of Sardis, B.C. 554. 
Subjection of the Asiatic Greeks by Harpagus, B.C. 553. Conquest of the 
remote East — Hyrcania, Parthia, Bactria, Sacia, Chorasmia, Sogdiana, Aria, 
Drangiana, Arachosia, Sattagydia, Gandaria — about B.C. 553 to 540. Expe- 
dition against Babylon, commenced B.C. 539, terminates successfully, B.C. 538. 
Importance of the fall of Semitism. 

5. The warlike prince, who thus conquered the Persian empire, 
did little to organise it. Professing, probably, a purer form of 



SECT. 3-6.] REIGN OF CYRUS. 87 

Zoroastrianism than that which prevailed in Media, where a 
mongrel religion had grown up from the mixture of 
the old Arian creed with Scythic element-worship, he Cy^us? 
retained his own form of belief as the religion ^•*^- 

558-529 

of the empire. Universal toleration was, however, 
established. The Jews, regarded with special favour as mono- 
theists, were replaced in their proper country. Ecbatana was 
kept as the capital, while Pasargadas became a sacred city, used 
for coronations and interments. The civilisation of the Medes, 
their art, architecture, ceremonial, dress, manners, and to some 
extent their luxury, were adopted by the conquering people. 
The employment of letters in inscriptions on public monuments 
began. No general system of administration was established. 
Some countries remained under tributary native kings; others 
were placed under governors ; in some the governmental functions 
were divided, and native officers shared the administration with 
Persians. The rate of tribute was not fixed. Cyrus left the 
work of consolidation and organisation to his successors, content 
to have given them an empire on which to exercise their powers. 

Interest attaching to the Persian religion from its comparative purity. 
Rehgious sympathy between the Jews and Persians. Primitive religion of 
the Persians contained in the Zendavesta, more especially its earlier portions, 
the Gdthas and the Vendidad. The attention of European scholars was first 
called to the Zendavesta by Anquetil DU Perron, whose Zend-wvesta, 
owvrage de Zoroastre, traduit en Franqais sur l' original Zend, was published at 
Paris in 1771. This work, which, though valuable at the time, was full of 
faults, is now superseded by the editions of Westergaard (1852-4) and Spiegel 
(185 1-8), and the German translation of the latter writer. The best com- 
ments on the Zenda-vesta are — 

BuRNOUF, Eugene, Commentaire sur le Yaqna. Paris, 1833 : 4to. 

Haug, Martin, Essays on the Sacred Language, Writings, and Religion of the 
Parsees. Bombay, 1862. 

Spiegel, F., Commentar uber das Avesta. Leipzig, 1864. 

Short accounts of the Zoroastrian religion, drawn from the best sources, will 
be found in Dr. Pusey's Lectures on Daniel, lectures viii. and ix., and in Raw- 
LINSON's Fi've Great Monarchies, vol. iii. ch. iv. 

6. The close of the reign of Cyrus is slirouded in some 
obscurity. We do not know why he did not carry out his designs 
against Egypt, nor what occupied him in the interval 
between b.c. 538 and 529. We cannot even say and death 
with any certainty against what enemy he was of^yi-us. 
engaged when he lost his life. Herodotus and Ctesias are here 
irreconcilably at variance, and though the authority of the former 
is greater, the narrative of the latter is in this instance the more 



88 PERSIA. [BOOK 11. 

credible. Both writers, however, are agreed that the Persian 
king was engaged in chastising an enemy on his north-eastern 
frontier, when he received the wound from which he died. 
Probably he was endeavouring to strike terror into the nomadic 
hordeSj, who here bordered the empire, and so to secure his terri- 
tories from their dreaded aggressions. If this was his aim, his 
enterprise was successful; for we hear of no invasion of Persia 
from the Turcoman country until after the time of Alexander. 

7. Cyrus left behind him two sons, Cambyses and Bardius, or 
(as the Greeks called him) Smerdis. To the former he left the 

Accession of ^egal title and the greater portion of his dominions ; 

Cambyses, to the latter he secured the inheritance of some 

Death of large and important provinces. This imprudent 

Smerdis. arrangement cost Smerdis his life, by rousing the 

jealousy of his brother, who very early in his reign caused him to 

be put to death secretly. 

8. The genius of Cambyses was warlike_, like that of his father; 
but he did not possess the same ability. Nevertheless he added 

Submission of ^niportant provinces to the empire. First of all he 
Phoenicia procured the submission of Phoenicia and Cyprus, 

and Cyprus. , . t 1 

Conquest of the great naval powers of Western Asia, which had 
Egypt, ifec. j^Q^ been subject to Cyrus. He then invaded Africa, 
B.C. 525, defeated Psammenitus in a pitched battle, took Memphis, 
conquered Egypt, received the submission of the neighbouring 
Libyan tribes^ and of the Greek towns of the Cyrenaica, and 
proceeded to form designs of remarkable grandeur. But these 
projects all miscarried. The expedition against Carthage was 
stopped by the refusal of the Phoenicians to attack their own 
colony; that against the oasis of Ammon ended in a frightful 
disaster. His own march against Ethiopia was arrested by the 
failure of provisions and water in the Nubian desert; and the 
losses which he incurred by persisting too long in his attempt 
brought Egypt to the brink of rebellion. The severe measures 
taken to repress this revolt were directed especially against the 
powerful caste of the priests, and had the effect of thoroughly 
alienating the province, which thenceforth never ceased to detest 
and plot against its conquerors. 

9. The stay of Cambyses in Egypt, imprudently prolonged, 
brought about a revolution at the Medo-Persian capital. A 
Magus, named Gomates; supported by his order, which was 



SECT. 7-1 1.] REIGN OF DARIUS I. 89 

powerful in many parts of the empire, ventured to personate 
the dead Smerdis, and seized the throne in his 

TT-1- -1 . 111^ Usurpation of 

name. His claim was tacitly acknowledged. Cam- the pseudo- 

byses, when the news reached him in Syria on his j?'?!^'^'^- 

march homewards, despairing of being able to make Cambyses, 

head against the impostor, committed suicide — b.c. ^'^' 
523 — after having reigned eight years. 

The Magian revolution was religious rather than political. The subject is 
still to some extent obscure ; but it seems certain that Magianism and Zoro- 
astrianism were at this time two distinct and opposed systems. The pre- 
tender was a Magus, born in the eastern part of Persia ; and the object of 
the revolution was to make Magianism the State religion. Its ill success 
re-established the pure religion of Zoroaster. 

10. To conciliate his subjects, the pseudo-Smerdis began his 
reign by a three years' remission of tribute, and an exemption 
of the conquered nations from military service for . 

the like space. At the same time, he adopted an pseudo- 
extreme system of seclusion, in the hope that his "^ ^^" 
imposture might escape detection, never quitting the palace, and 
allowing no communication between his wives and their relations. 
But the truth gradually oozed out. His religious reforms were 
startling in an Achsemenian prince. His seclusion was exces- 
sive and suspicious. Doubts began to be entertained, and secret 
messages between the great Persian nobles and some of the palace 
inmates converted these doubts into certainty. Darius, the son of 
Hystaspes, and probably heir-presumptive to the crown, headed an 
insurrection, and the impostor was slain after he had reigned 
eight months. 

Institution of the Magophonia, which continued to be observed down to 
the time of Artaxerxes Mnemon. Indication presented by this custom of 
a time when the Magi were not the Persian priests. 

11. Darius I, who ascended the throne in January, b.c. 521, 
and held it for nearly thirty-six years, was the greatest of the 
Persian monarchs. He was at once a conqueror Accession of 
and an administrator. During the earlier part of ^^"c|i' 
his reign he was engaged in a series of struggles Series of 
against rebellions, which broke out in almost all ^^^bV^' 
parts of the empire. Susiana, Babylonia, Persia 521-515. 
Proper, Media, Assyria, Armenia, Hyrcania, Parthia, Margiana, 
Sagartia, and Sacia successively revolted. The satraps in Egypt 
and Asia Minor acted as though independent of his authority. The 



go PERSIA. [BOOK II. 

empire was shaken to its centre, and threatened to fall to pieces. 
But the military talent and prudence of the legitimate monarch 
prevailed. Within the space of six years the rebellions were all 
put down^ the pretenders executed, and tranquillity generally 
restored throughout the disturbed provinces. 

12. The evils of disorganisation, which had thus manifested 
themselves so conspicuously, may have led Darius to turn his 
thoughts towards a remedy. At any rate, to him 
of the belongs the credit of having given to the Persian 
empire. empire that peculiar organisation and arrangement 
which maintained it in a fairly flourishing condition for nearly 
two centuries. He divided the whole empire into twenty (?) 
governments, called ^satrapies,' and established everywhere a 
uniform and somewhat complicated governmental system. Native 
tributary kings were swept away ^ and, in lieu of them, a single 
Persian official held in each province thp supreme civil authority. 
A standing army of Medo-Persians^ dispersed throughout the 
empire, supported the civil power, maintained tranquillity, and 
was ready to resist the attacks of foreigners. A fixed rate of 
tribute took the place of arbitrary exactions. ' Royal roads ' were 
established, and a system of posts arranged, whereby the court 
received rapid intelligence of all that occurred in the provinces, 
and promptly communicated its own commands to the remotest 
corners of the Persian territory. 

Peculiarities of the Persian governmental system, {a) Limits of satra- 
pies not always geographic, cognate tribes being grouped together, even though 
locally separate, {h) Elaborate system of checks established. The satrap, 
properly only the civil governor. Military povs^er wielded by the command- 
ants and commanders of garrisons. Institution of royal secretaries, attached 
to the courts of the satraps as 'King's Eyes ' and 'Ears'— with the right and duty 
of communicating directly with the Grown by the public post, and of keeping 
the king acquainted with all that occurred in their respective districts, {c) 
Visitation of pi-ovinces suddenly and without notice by royal commissioners, 
or by the king in person ; overhauling of the administration and public hear- 
ing of complaints. {£) Institution of royal judges, perhaps confined to Persia 
Proper, but important as indicating the separation, in some cases at any 
rate, of judicial from administrative functions. {/) Fixity of the tribute 
levied by the State on the provinces, and division of it into — i, a money pay- 
ment ; and 2, a payment in kind ; but indefinite power of exaction possessed 
by the satraps. Fui-ther revenue drawn by the State from — i. A water-rate ; 
2. Fisheries and the like; and 3. Presents. (/) Coinage of money, both 
gold and silver, on a large scale, and general circulation of both kinds of coin 
through the empire. Purity of the gold coinage extraordinary. 

Weak points of the system, and tendency to gradual corruption, {a) System 
of checks tends to weaken authority, and is found inconvenient in times of 
danger. Practice of uniting offices, especially those of satrap and com- 
mandant, begins. The great increase of power thus obtained by the satraps 



SECT. 12-15.] GOVERNMENTAL SYSTEM. 91 

leads naturally to formidable revolts. (Ji) Practical discontinuance of inspec- 
tions by royal commissioners removes an important check upon misgovern- 
ment. (c) A tendency to make offices hereditary shows itself; and this 
limits the power of the Crown, and helps forward the process of disintegra- 
tion. Detachment, partial or complete, of provinces from the empire. Pro- 
vinces once lost not often recovered. 

13. The military system, established or inherited by Darius, 
had for its object to combine the maximum of efficiency against 
a foreign enemy with the minimum of danger from Militai-y 
internal disaffection. The regular profession of system, 
arms was confined to the dominant race— or to that race and a 
few others of closely kindred origin — and a standing army, thus 
composed and amounting to several hundreds of thousands, main- 
tained order throughout the Great King's dominions^ and conducted 
the smaller and less important expeditions. But when danger 
threatened, or a great expedition was to be undertaken, the whole 
empire was laid under contribution; each one of the subject 
nations was required to send its quota ; and in this way armies 
were collected which sometimes exceeded a million of men. In 
the later times^ mercenaries were largely employed, not only in 
expeditions, but as a portion of the standing army. 

Internal organisation of the native standing army on a decimal system with 
six grades of officers. Three divisions of the service — infantry, cavalry, and 
chariots; but the last rarely used. Importance of the cavalry, which are 
either heavily armed, or exceedingly active and light. General goodness of 
the Persian troops, but worthlessness of the provincial levies. 

14. The navy of the Persians was drav/n entirely from the con- 
quered nations. Phoenicia, Egypt, Cyprus, Cilicia, Asiatic Greece, 
and other of the maritime countries subject to 

Persia, furnished contingents of ships and crews 
according to their relative strength ; and fleets were thus collected 
of above a thousand vessels. The ship of war ordinarily employed 
was the trireme ; but lesser vessels were also used occasionally. 
The armed force on board the ships (e7n/3arat or ' marines ') was 
Medo-Persian, either wholly or predominantly ; and the fleets 
were usually placed under a Persian or Median commander. 

15. The great king to whom Persia owed her civil, and (pro- 
bably in part) her military organisation, was not disposed to allow 
the warlike qualities of his subjects to rust for want , ,. 

•^ •' Indian expe- 

of exercise. Shortly after the revolts had been put dition of 
down, Darius I, by himself or by his generals, com- Danus. 
menced and carried out a series of military expeditions of first- 



92 , PERSIA. [BOOK II. 

rate importance. The earliest of these was directed against 
Western India, or the regions now known as the Punjab and 
Scinde. After exploring the country by means of boats, which 
navigated the Indus from Attock to the sea, he led or sent a body 
of troops into the region, and rapidly reduced it to subjection. 
A valuable gold-tract was thus added to the empire, and the 
revenue was augmented by about one-third. Commerce also 
received an impulse from the opening of the Indian market to 
Persian traders, who thenceforth kept up a regular communication 
with the tribes bordering the Indus by coasting vessels which 
started from the Persian Gulf. 

1 6. The next great expedition was in the most directly opposite 
direction. It was undertaken against the numerous and warlike 

His invasion Scythian nation which possessed the vast plains of 
° about ^^' Southern Russia, extending between the Don and 
B.C. 508. the Danube, the region now generally known as the 
Ukraine, The object of this expedition was not conquest, but 
the exhibition of the Persian military strength, the sight of which 
was calculated to strike terror into the Scythic hordes, and to 
prevent them from venturing to invade the territory of so powerful 
a neighbour. The great Persian kings, like the great Roman 
emperors, caused their own frontiers to be respected by over- 
stepping them and ravaging with fire and sword the countries of 
the fierce northern barbarians. 

Date of the expedition, probably about B. c. 508. Passage of the Bosphorus 
by a bridge of boats. Army marches through Thrace, while the fleet proceeds to 
bridge the Danube. Submission of the maritime Thracians. Resistance and 
conquest of the Getas. Passage of the Danube and invasion of Scythia. 
Unresisted march of Darius through the country. His troops burn the 
inland town of Gelonus. He retires without loss, re-crosses the Danube, and 
returns to Asia in triumph. 

17. The sequel of the Scythian expedition was the firm establish- 
ment of the Persian power on the European side of the straits, 

Thrace and and the rapid extension of it over the parts of 

^Tuered°'^' Thrace bordering on the ^Egean, over the adjoining 

Macedon country of Pseonia, and even over the still more 

B_Q_ ' remote Macedonia. The Persian dominion now 

507, 506. reached from the Indian desert to the borders of 

Thessaly, and from the Caucasus to Ethiopia. 

18. Simultaneously with the Scythic expedition, Aryandes, the 
satrap of Egypt, marched against the Greek town of Barca, in 



SECT. 16-20.] REIGN OF DARIUS I. 93 

Africa, to avenge the murder of a king who was a Persian tribu- 
tary. Barca was taken, and its inhabitants trans- -^ 
planted to Asia ; but the hostility of the semi- punished by 
independent nomads was aroused, and the army on ^^^ ^^' 
its return suffered no inconsiderable losses. 

19. Not long afterwards the ambitious designs of Darius were 
violently interrupted by a revolt second in importance to scarcely 
any of those which had occupied his early years. Revolt of 
The Greeks of Asia, provoked by the support which ^Gj^gifJ;'" 
Darius lent to their tyrants, and perhaps rendered b.c. 501. 
sensible of their power by the circumstances of the Scythic cam- 
paign, broke out into general rebellion at the instigation of Aris- 
tagoras of Miletus, murdered or expelled their tyrants, and defied 
the power of Persia. Two states of European Greece, Athens and 
Eretria, joined the rebels. Bold counsels prevailed, Burnin of 
and an attack was made on the satrapial capital, Sardis, 

BO 500 

Sardis. Unfortunately, the capture of the city was ^nd battle of 
followed by its accidental conflagration j and the Ephesus. 
small knot of invaders^ forced to retreat, were overtaken and*' 
defeated in the battle of Ephesus, whereupon the two European 
allies deserted the falling cause. On the other hand, numerous 
states, both European and Asiatic, excited by the news of the fall 
of Sardis, asserted independence ; and the flames of rebellion were 
lighted along the entire Asiatic coast from the Sea of Marmora to 
the Gulf of Issus. The Ionian, iEolic, and Hellespontine Greeks, 
the Carians and Caunians of the south-western corner of the 
peninsula, and the Cyprians, both Greek and native, made common 
cause; several battles were fought with varying success; but at 
last the power of Persia prevailed. The confederate 
fleet suffered defeat in the battle of Lade, and soon Lad^, 
afterwards Miletus was taken. The rebellious states ^" °" ^^^' 
were punished with great severity, and the authority of Darius 
was once more firmly established in all the revolted countries. 

Imprudent conduct of Athens at this juncture. Unless she was prepared 
to put forth all her strength, and give effectual aid to the insurrection, she 
had far better have taken no share in it. Would not it, however, have been 
true wisdom on her part to have made every effort in order to transfer the 
war, with which she was already threatened, into the enemy's country ? 

20. The honour of the Great King required that immediate 
vengeance should be taken on the bold foreigners who had inter- 



94 PERSIA. [BOOK 11. 

meddled between him and his subjects. But, even apart from 

First expedi- ^^^^^5 ^^ expedition against Greece was certain, and 

tion against could Only be a question of time. The exploring 

Mardonius voyagc of Democcdes, about B.C. 510, shows that 

fails. eyen before the Scythian campaign an attack on 

this quarter was intended. An expedition was therefore fitted out, 

in B.C. 493, under Mardonius, which took the coast-line through 

Thrace and Macedonia. A storm at Athos, however, shattered 

the fleet \ and the land army was crippled by a night attack of the 

Brygi. Mardonius returned home without effecting his purpose- 

but his expedition was not wholly fruitless. His fleet reduced 

Thasos ; and his army forced the Macedonians to exchange their 

position of semi-independence for complete subjection to Persia. 

21. The failure of Mardonius was followed within two years 

by the second great expedition against Greece — the first which 

reached it — that conducted by Datis. Datis pro- 

becond expe- . ■' ^ 

dition under ceeded by sea, crossing through the Cyclades, and 
B c 490 falling first upon Eretria, which was besieged, and 
Battle of taken by treachery. A landing was then made at 
Marathon; but the defeat of the Persian host by 
Miltiades, and his rapid march to Athens immediately after the 
victory, frustrated the expedition, disappointing alike the com- 
mander and the Athenian ex-tyrant, Hippias, who had accom- 
panied it. 

Importance of the victory at Marathon. First great check received by the 
Persians. The defeat showed how utterly powerless were the vast masses of 
an Oriental army against the disciplined valour of the Greeks. The whole 
history of the contest between Greece and Persia is but a repetition of this 
early lesson. 

11. Undismayed by his two failures, Darius commenced pre- 
parations for a third attack, and would probably have proceeded 
Third expe- ^^ person against Athens, had not the revolt of 

dition Egypt first (B.C. 487), and then his own death (b.c. 
stopped by °l^ . ^ . ii . ,. , r • • 

Darius' death, 400)5 intervened. Darius died after nominating as 

B. c. 486. ]^jg successor, not his eldest son, Artobazanes, but 
the eldest of his sons by Atossa^ daughter of Cyrus — a prince who 
had thus the advantage of having in his veins the blood of the 
great founder of the empire. 

33. Darius probably died at Susa; but he was buried in the vici- 
nity of Persepolis, where he had prepared himself an elaborate rock 



SECT. 21-25.] REIGN OF XERXES I. 95 

tomb, adorned with sculptures and bearing a long inscription — all 
which remain to the present day. The great palace Great works 
of Persepolis, in all its extent and grandeur, was ^^ Danus I. 
his conception, if not altogether his work ; as was also the equally, 
magnificent structure at Susa, which was the ordinary royal resi- 
dence from his time. He likewise set up the great rock inscrip- 
tion at Behistun (Bagistan), the most valuable of all the Persian 
monumental remains. Other memorials of his reign have been 
found, or are known to have existed, at Ecbatana, at Byzantium, in 
Thrace, and in Egypt. In the last-named country he re-opened 
the great canal between the Nile and the Red Sea, which the 
Ramessides had originally cut, and the Psamatiks had vainly 
endeavoured to re-establish. 

The best representations of the magnificent buildings at Persepolis will be 
found in the costly work of MM. Flandin and Coste, entitled Voyage en Perse, 
6 vols., large folio. Pai'is, 1845-50, published by the French Government. 
Nearly equal to this is a production of private enterprise, the work of the 
Baron Texier, called Description de V Armenie, de la Perse, et de la Mesopotamie, 
2 vols., folio. Paris, 1842-52. 

Representations on a smaller scale, accompanied with much ingenious com- 
ment, will be found in the following works : — 

FergUSSON, James, Palaces of Nineveh and Persepolis restored • 8vo. London, 
1851 ; and History of Architecture, vol. i. London, 1865, et seqq. 

Students may also consult the chapter on ' Persian Architecture,' in Raw- 
linson's Five Great Monarchies, vol. iv. ch. v., and the account of Persepolis 
\n\AVX^S Nineveh and Persepolis ; 8vo. London, 185 1. 

The only authentic account yet giyen of the ruins of Susa is contained in 

LoFTUS, W. K., Travels and Researches in Chaldcea and Susiana ; 8vo. 
London, 1857. 

24. Xerxes I, who succeeded Darius, B.C. 486, commenced his 
reign by the reduction of Egypt, b.c 485, which he entrusted to 
his brother, Achaemenes. He then provoked and 
chastised a rebellion of the Babylonians, enriching xerxes°i 
himself with the plunder of their temples. After this ^- ^■ 

. ^ ,,. . ,. . r^ 486-465. 

he turned his attention to the invasion or Greece. 

35. Too much weight has probably been assigned to the cabals 
and intrigues of the Persian nobles, and the Greek refugees at 
Xerxes' court. Until failure checked the military 

, ■ /- j_i j_- -r» • • Great expedi- 

aspirations of the nation, a Persian prince was tion against 
almost under the necessity of undertakins; some Greece, 

, . . ^ ,. B.C. 480. 

great conquest ; and there was at this time no direc- 
tion in which an expedition could so readily be undertaken as 
towards the west. Elsewhere high mountains, broad seas, or 
barren deserts skirted the empire — here only did Persian territory 



96 PERSIA, [BOOK II. 

adjoin on a fruitful, well-watered, and pleasant region. The 
attempt to reduce Greece was the natural sequel to the conquests 
of Egypt, India, Thrace, and Macedon. 

Details of the Expedition. Careful preparation for the space of four 
years, B.C. 484 to 481. Immense host collected. Question of its numbers. 
Excellent commissariat arrangements. Large and well-appointed fleet. March 
of the expedition in three columns along the coast, B.C. 480. Passage of the 
Hellespont on a double bridge of boats. Grand review at Doriscus. Advance 
through Thessaly unresisted. Fleet passes through canal of Athos. First 
disaster — loss of 400 ships by a storm off Cape Sepias. First encounter of 
land forces at Thermopylce. Failure of the direct attack. Pass turned, and 
its defenders all slain. Sea-fights about the same time off Artemisium with 
indecisive result. Second disaster — loss of 200 ships off the coast of Euboea. 
Advance through Phocis and Boeotia. Force detached against Delphi fails to 
take it. Invasion of Attica ; Athens taken and burnt. General alarm. Greek 
naval force on the point of breaking up, is prevented by Themistocles, who 
brings about the battle of Salamis (Sept. 23, B.C. 480), which completes the 
destruction of the Persian fleet. Retreat of Xerxes. A picked Persian army 
under Mardonius winters in Thessaly, and resumes offensive operations in 
the spring, B.C. 479. Attica re-occupied. Negotiations opened with Argos. 
Sudden resolve of Sparta to take the offensive ; large army gathered at the 
Isthmus enters Attica. Retirement of Mardonius into Boeotia. Battle of 
Plataea, Sept. 25, B.C. 479, and complete destruction of the Persian host. 
Persians never again invade European Greece. Last remnant of the Persian 
fleet attacked by Leotychides at Mycale. Protecting land force defeated, 
and ships burnt. 

26. It was now the turn of the Greeks to retaliate on their 

prostrate foe. First under the lead of Sparta and then under that 

of Athens they freed the islands of the ^gean from 

atTitude^ the Persian yoke, expelled the Persian garrisons 

assumed by from Europe, and , even ravaged the Asiatic coast 

Battle of the ^.nd made descents on it at their pleasure. For 

Eurymedon, twelve years no Persian fleet ventured to dispute 

B. c. 466. 1,1 1 

with them the sovereignty of the seas; and when 
at last, in b.c. 466, a naval force was collected to protect Cilicia 
and Cyprus, it was defeated and destroyed by Cimon at the 
Eurymedon. 

37. Soon after this Xerxes' reign came to an end. This weak 

prince, after the failure of his grand expedition, desisted from 

all military enterprise. No doubt his empire was 

character of greatly injured and exhausted by its losses in the 

Xerxes. Grecian war, and a period of repose was absolutely 

Corruption of ' _ ' ^ ^ 

the court necessary ; but it would seem to have been natural 

un er im. temperament, as much as prudence, that caused the 

unwarlike monarch to rest content under his discomfiture, and to 

make no effort to wipe out its disgrace. Xerxes, on his return to 



SECTS. 26-29.] REIGN OF ARTAXERXES I. 97 

Asia, found consolation for his military failure in the delights of 
the seraglio, and ceased to trouble himself much about affairs of 
State. He was satisfied to check the further progress of the Greeks 
by corrupting their cleverest statesmen; and, submitting himself 
to the government of women and eunuchs, lost all manliness of 
character. His own indulgence in illicit amours caused violence 
and bloodshed in his family ; and his example encouraged a similar 
profligacy in others. The bloody and licentious deeds which stain 
the whole of the later Persian history commence with Xerxes, who 
suffered the natural penalty of his follies and his 

, r, ■ • .' , 1 His murder. 

crimes when, after reigning twenty years, he was 

murdered by the captain of his guard, Artabanus, and Aspamitres, 

his chamberlain. 

Probable identity of Xerxes with the Ahasuerus of Esther. The name 
Ahasuerus is the natural Semitic equivalent of the Arian Khshayarsha or 
Xerxes. Similarity of character. Agreement of the dates. Esther, how- 
ever, cannot be Amestris, if we accept the stories which Herodotus tells of 
that princess. 

38. Artabanus placed on the throne the youngest son of Xerxes, 
Artaxerxes I, called by the' Greeks Macrocheivj or ' the Long-Handed.' 
The eldest son, Darius, accused by Artabanus of his Reign of 
father's assassination, was executed ; the second, Artaxerxes I. 

. T^ . , . , , Troubles of 

Hystaspes, who was satrap of JBactria, claimed the his first year, 
crown; and, attempting to enforce his claim, was b.c. 465. 
defeated and slain in battle. About the same time the crimes of 
Artabanus were discovered, and he was put to death. 

29. Artaxerxes then reigned quietly for nearly forty years. He 
was a mild prince, possessed of several good qualities; but the 
weakness of his character caused a rapid declension Revolt of 
of the empire under his sway. The revolt of Egypt Egypt, 
was indeed suppressed after a while through the Suppressed, 
vigorous measures of the satrap of Syria, Mega- ^- ^- '^^^• 
byzus; and the Athenians, who had fomented it, were punished 
by the complete destruction of their fleet, and the loss of almost 
all their men. But the cruelty and perfidy shown in the execution 
of the captured Inarus must have increased Egyptian disaffection, 
while at the same time it disgusted Megabyzus and the better class 
of Persians, and became the cause of fresh misfortunes. 

Revolt breaks out under Inarus, king of the Libyans, assisted by Amyrtseus, 
an Egyptian, B.C. 460. Battle of Papremis ; Achaemenes defeated and slain. 
Persians shut up in Memphis. Aid of Athens asked, and 200 ships sent. 

H 



98 PERSIA. [BOOK II. 

Memphis taken, except the citadel (White-castle). Persian army enters 
Egypt under Megabyzus. Defeat of Inarus and relief of Memphis. De- 
struction of the Athenian squadron and capture of Inarus, B.C. 455. Amyrtseus 
maintains himself for six years more in the Delta, B.C. 455 to 449. 

30. Bent on recovering her prestige, Athens, in B.C. 449, de- 
spatched a fleet to the Levant, under Cimon, which sailed to 

Battle of Cyprus and laid siege to Citium. There Cimon 

Cyprus and died j but the fleet, which had been under his orders, 

Manias, attacked and completely defeated a large Persian 

B.C. 449. armament off Salamis, besides detaching a squadron 

to assist Amyrtseus, who still held out in the Delta. Persia, 

dreading the loss of Cyprus and Egypt, consented to an inglorious 

peace. The independence of the Asiatic Greeks was recognised. 

Persia undertook not to visit with fleet or army the coasts of 

Western Asia Minor, and Athens agreed to abstain from attacks 

on Cyprus and Egypt. The Greek cities ceded by this treaty — 

the ' peace of Callias ' — to the Atheniain confederacy included all 

those from the mouth of the Hellespont to Phaselis in Lycia, but 

did not include the cities on the shores of the Black Sea. 

31. Scarcely less damaging to Persia was the revolt of Mega- 
byzus, which followed. This powerful noble, disgusted at the 

^ , , treatment of Inarus, which was contrary to his 
Revolt of -' ^ 

Megabyzus, pledged word, excited a rebellion in Syria, and so 

B.C. 447. alarmed Artaxerxes that he was allowed to dictate 
the terms on which he would , consent to be reconciled to his 
sovereign. An example was thus set of successful rebellion on 
the part of a satrap, which could not but have disastrous conse- 
quences. The prestige of the central government was weakened ; 
and provincial governors were tempted to throw off their alle- 
giance on any fair occasion that offered itself; since, if successful, 
they had nothing to fear^ and in any case they might look for 
pardon. 

32. The disorders of the court continued, and indeed increased, 
under Artaxerxes I, who allowed his mother Amestris, and his 

sister Amytis, who was married to Megabyzus, to 
Artaxerxes I, indulge freely the cruelty and licentiousness of their 
B. c. 425. dispositions. Artaxerxes died b. c. 4 25, and left his 
crown to his only legitimate son, Xerxes II. 

33. Revolutions in the government now succeeded each other 
with great rapidity. Xerxes II, after reigning forty-five days, was 



SECTS. 30-36.] REIGN OF DARIUS NOTHUS. 99 

assassinated by his half-brother, Secydianus or Sogdianus, an 
illegitimate son of Artaxerxes^ who seized the throne. Reigns of 
but was murdered in his turn, after a reign of six ^^^nd ^^ 
months and a half, by another brother, Ochus. Secydianus. 

34. Ochus, on ascending the throne, took the name of Darius, 
and is known in history as Darius Nothus. He was married to 
Parysatis, his aunt, a daughter of Xerxes I, and ^ 

. ■' -' :> D :» Accession ot 

reigned nineteen years, b.c. 424 to 405, under her Darius II, 

tutelage. His reign, though chequered with some Rapid dectine 

gleams of sunshine, was on the whole disastrous, of the State. 
Revolt succeeded to revolt ; and, though most of the satraps, 
insurrections were quelled, it was at the cost of .^^•^■. 

^ ' 423-414. 

what remained of Persian honour and self-respect. 
Corruption was used instead of force against the rebellious armies; 
and the pledges freely given to the leaders in order to procure 
their submission were systematically disregarded. Arsites, the 
king's brother, his fellow-conspirator, a brother of Megabyzus,, 
and Pissuthnes, the satrap of Lydia, were successively entrapped in 
this way, and suffered instant execution. So low had the feeling 
of honour sunk, that Pissuthnes' captor, Tissaphernes, instead of 
showing indignation, like Megabyzus (see above, § 31), accepted 
the satrapy of his victim, and thus made himself a participant in 
his sovereign's perfidy. 

0^^. Still more dangerous to the State, if less disgraceful, were 
the practices which now arose of uniting commonly the offices of 
satrap and commander of the forces, and of com- Relaxation of 
mitting to a single governor two, or even three, authonty. 
satrapies. The authority of the Crown was relaxed ; satraps be- 
came practically uncontrolled • their lawless acts were winked at 
or condoned; and their governments tended more and more to 
become hereditary fiefs — the first step, in empires like the Persian, 
to disintegration. 

0^6. The revolts of satraps were followed by national outbreaks, 
which, though sometimes quelled, were in other National out- 
instances successful. In b.c. 408, the Medes, who breaks. 
had patiently acquiesced in Persian rule for more the Medes, 
than a century, made an effort to shake off the ?,• ^- f °^; 

■' ^ Revolt of 

yoke, but were defeated and reduced to subjection. Egypt, 
Three years later, e.g. 405, Egypt once more b.c 405. 
rebelled, under Nepherites, and succeeded in establishing its 

H 2 



loo PERSIA. [BOOK II. 

independence. (See above. Book I. Part II. § 23.) The Persians 
were expelled from Africa, and a native prince seated himself 
on the throne of the Pharaohs. 

37. It was some compensation for this loss, and perhaps for 
others towards the north and north-east of the empire, that in 

Asia Minor the authority of the Great King was 
the°Greek once more established over the Greek cities. It 
continental -^^g the Peloponnesian War, rather than the peace 

cities by 

Persia, in of Callias, wliich had prevented any collision be- 

of"tlfe%do^ tween the great powers of Europe and Asia for 

ponnesian War, thirty-seven years. Both Athens and Sparta had 

B c 412 

their hands full; and though it might have been 
expected that Persia would have at once taken advantage of the 
quarrel to reclaim at least her lost continental dominion, yet she 
seems to have refrained, through moderation or fear, until the 
Athenian disasters in Sicily encourage,d her to make an effort. 
She then invited the Spartans to Asia, and by the treaties which 
she concluded with them, and the aid which she gave them, 
re-acquired without a struggle all the Greek cities of the coast. 
It was her policy, however, not to depress Athens too much — 
a policy which was steadily pursued, till the personal ambition 
of the younger Cyrus caused a departure from the line dictated 
by prudence. 

Satraps of Asia Minor required to collect the tribute of the Greek cities, 
B.C. 413. Tissaphernes and Pharnabazus invite the Spartans to Asia. First 
treaty made by Sparta with Tissaphernes, B.C. 412. Second and third treaty 
in the same year. By the last all Asia expressly ceded to the king. Tissa- 
phernes helps the Spartans, but cautiously. In disgust they quit him and 
accept the invitation of Pharnabazus. Rivalry of the satraps injurious to 
Persia. Pharnabazus, however, pursues the same policy as Tissaphernes, only 
more clumsily, till Cyrus appears upon the scene, B. c. 407, and, being anxious 
to obtain effectual aid from the Spartans, embraces their side of the quarrel 
heartily, and enables Lysander to bring the war to an end. 

38. The progress of corruption at court kept pace with the 
general decline which may be traced in all parts of the empire. 

Corruption The powcr of the eunuchs increased, and they began 
of the court, ^q aspire, not only to govern the monarch, but 
actually to seat themselves upon the throne. Female influence 
more and more directed the general course of affairs; and the 
vices of conscious weakness, perfidy and barbarity, came to be 
looked upon as the mainstays of government. 

39. Darius Nothus died B.C. 405, and was succeeded by his 



SECTS. 37-41.] REIGN OF ARTAXERXES MNEMON. loi 

eldest son, Arsaces, who on his accession took the name of Arta- 
xerxes, Artaxerxes II, called by the Greeks Mnemon Reign of 
on account of the excellence of his memory, had from ^'taxeixes II, 
the very first a rival in his brother Cyrus. Parysatis 405-362. 
had endeavoured to gain the kingdom for her younger son, while 
the succession was still open ; and when her efforts failed, and 
Artaxerxes was named to succeed his father, she encouraged Cyrus 
to vindicate his claim by arms. It would undoubtedly have been 
advantageous to Persia that the stronger-minded of Attempt of 
the two brothers should have been victor in the Cyms. 
struggle ; but the fortune of war decided otherwise. Cnnaxa, 
Cyrus fell at Cunaxa, a victim to his own im- ^•*^- ^^^• 
petuosity; and Artaxerxes II obtained undisputed possession of 
the throne, which he held for above forty years. 

March of Cyrus from Sardis in the spring of B.C. 401. Passage of the 
Euphrates, about July. Battle of Cunaxa, about September. Treacherous 
massacre of the generals. Return of the Ten Thousand under Xenophon 
during the winter and the ensuing spring, B.C. 401 to 400. 

40. The expedition of Cyrus produced a complete change in 
the relations between Persia and Sparta. Sparta had given Cyrus 
important assistance, and thereby irremediably war between 
offended the Persian monarch. The result of the Sparta and 

,. . 1 , . . , Persia, 

expedition encouraged her to precipitate the rupture b. c 

which she had provoked. Having secured the ser- 399-394. 
vices of the Ten Thousand, she attacked the Persians in Asia 
Minor ; and her troops, under Thimbron, Dercyllidas^ and Agesi- 
laiis, made the Persians tremble for their Asiatic dominion. 
Wisely resolving to find her enemy employment at home, Persia 
brought about a league between the chief of the secondary powers 
of Greece — Argos, Thebes, Athens, and Corinth — supplying 
them with the sinews of war, and contributing a contingent of 
ships, which at once turned the scale, and by the battle of Cnidus, 
B. c. 394, gave the mastery of the sea to the confederates. 
Agesilaiis was recalled to Europe, and Sparta found herself so 
pressed that she was glad to agree to the peace, p ^^ 
known as that of Antalcidas, whereby the Greeks Antalcidas, 
of Europe generally relinquished to Persia their 
Asiatic brethren, and allowed the Great King to assume the part 
of authoritative arbiter in the Grecian quarrels, B.C. 387. 

41. Glorious as the peace of Antalcidas was for Persia, and 



I02 PERSIA. [BOOK II. 

satisfactory as it must have been to her to see her most formidable 

, ^ enemies engaged in internecine conflict one with 
Revolt of ^ ° 

Evagoras, another, yet the internal condition of the empire 
who^sulmiits showed no signs of improvement. The revolt 
upon terms, of Evagoras, Greek tyrant of Salamis in Cyprus, 

"R P ^70 

was with difficulty put down, after a long and 
doubtful struggle, b.c. 391 to 379, in which disaffection was 
exhibited by the Phoenicians, the Cilicians, the Carians^ and the 
Idumaean Arabs. The terms made with Evagoras were a confes- 
sion of weakness, since he retained his sovereignty, and merely 
consented to pay the Persian king an annual tribute. 

42. The revolt of the Cadusians on the shores of the Caspian 
about this same period, b. c. 384, gave Artaxerxes II an oppor- 
tunity of trying his own qualifications for military 

Cadusians, command. The trial was unfavourable ; for he was 
B.C. 384. Qj^jy saved from disaster by the skill of Tiribazus, 
one of his officers, who procured with consummate art the sub- 
mission of the rebels. 

43. Artaxerxes, however, proud of the success which might be 
said, on the whole, to have attended his arms, was not content 

Schemes of "^i^h the mere recovery of newly-revolted provinces, 
Artaxerxes. but aspired to restore to the empire its ancient limits. 
Gi^ao^. His generals commenced the reduction of the Greek 
Expedition islands by the occupation of Samos; and in e.g. '>^']^^ 
Egypt, having secured the services of the Athenian com- 
B. c. 376. mander, Iphicrates, he sent a great expedition 

against Egypt, which was intended to reconquer that country. 

Iphicrates, however, and Pharnabazus, the Persian commander, 

quarrelled. The expedition wholly failed: and the 
Revolts. ? , , ^ , ^ ., , , , . . 

knowledge of the failure provoked a general spirit 

of disaffection in the western satrapies, which brought the 

empire to the verge of destruction. But corruption and treachery, 

now the usual Persian weapons, were successful once more. 

. ., .. . Orontes and Rheomithras took bribes to desert 

Agesilaus m 

Egypt, their confederates j Datames was entrapped and 
executed. An attempt of Egypt, favoured by Sparta, 
and promoted by Agesilaiis in person, e.g. 361, to annex Phoenicia 
and Syria, was frustrated by internal commotions, and the reign of 
Artaxerxes closed without any further contraction of the Persian 
territory. 



SECTS. 42-48.] REIGN OF ARTAXERXES OCHUS. 103 

44. The court continued during the reign of Artaxerxes II 
a scene of horrors and atrocities of the same kind that had pre- 
vailed since the time of Xerxes I. Parysatis,the queen- Disorders of 
mother, was its presiding spirit ^ and the long cata- the court. 
logue of her cruel and bloody deeds is almost without a parallel 
even in the history of Oriental despotisms. The members of the 
royal household became now the special objects of jealousy to one 
another j family affection had disappeared ; and executions, assas- 
sinations, and suicides decimated the royal stock. 

45. Ochus, the youngest legitimate son of Artaxerxes II, who 
had obtained the throne by the execution of his eldest and the 
suicide of his second brother, assumed on his acces- Reign of 
sion (b c. 359) the name of his father, and is known ^'^taxerxes HI, 
as Artaxerxes III. He was a prince of more vigour 359-338. 
and spirit than any monarch since Darius Hystaspis; and the 
power, reputation, and general prosperity of the empire were' 
greatly advanced under his administration. The court, however, 
was incurably corrupt j and Ochus cannot be said to have at all 
improved its condition. Rather_, it was a just Nemesis by which, 
after a reign of twenty-one years^ B.C. 359 to 338, he fell a victim 
to a conspiracy of the seraglio. 

46. The first step taken by the new king was the complete de- 
struction of the royal family, or, at any rate, of all 

but its more remote branches. Having thus secured of the royal 
himself against rivals, he proceeded to arrange and ^'^"^ ' 
execute some important enterprises. 

47. The revolt of Artabazus in Asia Minor, fomented at first 
by Athens, and afterwards by Thebes, was important both as 
delaying the grand enterprise of Ochus, and as lead- Revolt of 
ing to the first betrayal of a spirit inimical to Persia .^o^flfeTto 
on the part of Philip of Macedon. Philip received PhiUp of 
Artabazus as a refugee at his court, and thus pro- ^ ^ ' 
voked those hostile measures to which Ochus had 356-353. 
recourse later in his reign — measures which furnished a ground 
of complaint to Alexander. 

48. About B.C. 351, Ochus marched a large army into JEgypt, bent 
on recovering that province to the empire. Necta- First expedi- 
nebo, however, the Egyptian king, met him in the ^^°a"fi2?"^ 
field, defeated him, and completely repulsed his Egypt fails. 
expedition. Ochus returned to Persia to collect fresh forces, and 



I04 PERSIA. . [BOOK 11. 

immediately the whole of the West was in a flame. Phoenicia re- 
Revolts, claimed her independence and placed herself under the 
government of Tennes, king of Sidon, Cyprus revolted and set 
up nine native sovereigns. In Asia Minor a dozen petty chief- 
tains assumed the airs of actual monarchs. Ochus, however, 
nothing daunted, employed his satraps to quell or check the revolts, 
while he himself collected a second armament, obtained the ser- 
vices of Greek generals, and hired Greek mercenaries to the 
number of 10,000. He then proceeded in person against Phoe- 
nicia and Egypt, b.c. 346. 

49. Partly by force, but mainly by treachery, Sidon was taken 
and Phoenicia reduced to subjection; Mentor, with 4,000 

Second expe- Greeks, deserting and joining the Persians. Egypt 
dition against ^^g ^^ye^ ^ second time invaded: Nectanebo was 

Fnoenicia and ' 

Egypt, defeated and driven from the country; and the 

which are Egyptian satrapy was recovered. The glory which 

recovered. Ochus thus acquired was great ; but the value of 

his success, as an indication of reviving Persian vigour, was 

diminished by the fact that it was mainly owing to the conduct 

of Greek generals and the courage of Greek mercenaries. Still, 

Period of to Bagoas, the eunuch, and to Ochus himself, some 

■"gour. q£ ^]^g credit must be allowed; and the vigorous 

administration which followed on the Egyptian campaign gave 

promise of a real recovery of pristine force and strength. But this 

prospect was soon clouded by a fresh revolution in the palace, which 

removed the most capable of the later iVchsemenian monarchs. 

50. A savage cruelty was one of the most prominent features 
in the character of Ochus; and his fierceness and violence had 

Ochus is i"endered him unpopular with his subjects when 
murdered by the eunuch Bagoas, his chief minister, ventured on 
B. c. 338. his assassination, b. c. 338. Bagoas placed Arses, 
Reign of ^Y^Q king's youngest son, upon the throne, and de- 
stroyed the rest of the seed royal. It was his object 
to reign as minister of a prince who was little more than a boy ; 
but after two years he grew alarmed at some threats that Arses 
had uttered, and secured himself by a fresh murder. Not venturing 
to assume the vacant crown himself, he conferred it on a friend, 
named Codomannus — perhaps descended from Darius II — who 
mounted the throne under the title of Darius III, and immediately 
put to death the wretch to whom he owed his elevation, b. c. ^;^6. 



SECTS. 49-51.] REIGN OF DARIUS III. 105 

5 1 . Superior morally to the greater number of his predecessors, 
Darius III did not possess sufficient intellectual ability to enable 
him to grapple with the difficulties of the circum- Reign of 
stances in which he was placed. The Macedonian ^^^^^ lil' 
invasion of Asia, which had commenced before he 336-330. 
mounted the throne, failed to alarm him as it ought to have done. 
He probably despised Alexander's youth and inexperience ; at any 
rate, it is certain that he took no sufficient measures to guard his 
country against the attack with which it was threatened. Had 
Persia joined the European enemies of Alexander in the first year 
of his reign, the Macedonian conquest of Asia might never have 
taken place. Still, Darius was not wholly wanting to the occasion. 
An important native and mercenary force was collected in Mysia 
to oppose the invader^ if he should land j and a large fleet was 
sent to the coast, which ought to have made the passage of the 
Hellespont a matter of difficulty. But the remissness and over- 
confidence of the Persian leaders rendered these ., ., 

Alexander 

measures ineffectual. Alexander's landing was un- invades Asia, 
opposed, and the battle of the Granicus (b. c. 334), 
which might have been avoided, caused the immediate loss of all 
Asia Minor. Soon afterwards^ the death of Memnon deprived 
Darius of his last chance of success by disconcerting all his plans 
for the invasion of Europe. Compelled to act wholly on the 
defensive, he levied two great armies, and fought battle of 
two great battles against his foe. In the first of Issus, 

B c 333 

these, at Issus (b. c. '^'^'^j he no doubt threw away 

all chance of victory by engaging his adversary in a defile; but in 

the second all the advantages that nature had placed on the side 

of the Persians were given full play. The battle of Arbela (Oct. 

I, B. c. 331), fought in the broad plains of Adiabene, 

on ground carefully selected and prepared by the Arbela, 

Persians, fairly tested the relative strength of the ^' ^' 

two powers; and when it was lost, the empire of Persia came 

naturally to an end. The result of the contest might have been 

predicted from the time of the battle of Marathon. The inveterate 

tendency of Greece to disunion, and the liberal employment of 

Persian gold, had deferred a result that could not be prevented, for 

nearly two centuries. 

For the details of the Greek wars with Persia, see Book III. Third Period ; 
and for those of the war between Darius and Alexander, see Book IV. First 
Period. 



BOOK III. 



HISTORY OF THE GRECIAN STATES FROM THE EARLIEST 
TIMES TO THE ACCESSION OF ALEXANDER. 



Geographical Outline. 

I. Hellas, or Greece Proper, is a peninsula of moderate size, 

bounded on the north by Olympus, the' Cambunian mountains, 

and an artificial line prolonged westward to the 

vShape, Acroceraunian promontory : on the west by the 

boundaries, .,.. t • y-.iri »yri- 

and size of Adriatic or Ionian Gulf j on the south by the Medi- 
ancient terranean ; and on the east by the ^gean Sea. Its 
greatest length from north to south, between the 
Cambunian mountains and Cape Tsenarus, is about 350 English 
miles; its greatest width, between the Acroceraunian promontory 
and the mouth of the Peneus, or again between the coast of Acar- 
nania and Marathon in Attica, is about 180 miles. Its super- 
ficial extent has been estimated at 35,000 square miles, which is 
somewhat less than the size of Portugal. 

%. The geographical features which most distinctly characterise^ 

the Hellenic Peninsula are the number of its mountains and the 

extent of its sea-board. Numerous deep bays 

terisdcT^'^' strongly indent the coast, while long and narrow 

1. Extent of promontories run out far into the sea on all sides, 

1. Number causing the proportion of coast to area to be very 

of moiintain jn^ch greater than is found in any other country of 

chains. '-' ^ ' 

Southern Europe. Excellent harbours abound; the 
tideless sea has few dangers ; off the coast lie numerous littoral 
islands of great beauty and fertility. Nature has done her utmost 
to tempt the population to maritime pursuits, and to make them 
cultivate the art of navigation. Communication between most 



GREECE. 107 

parts of the country is shorter and easier by sea than by land j for 
the mountain chains which intersect the region in all directions 
are for the most part lofty and rugged, traversable only by a few 
passes, often blocked by snow in the winter time, 

3. The Mountain-system of Greece may best be regarded as an 
offshoot from the great European chain of the Alps. At a point 
a little to the west of the aist degree of longitude 
(£. from Greenwich), the Albanian Alps throw out description 
a spur, which- under the names of Scardus, Pindus, of themoun- 

^ -' ^ ' ' tain-system. 

Corax, Taphiassus, Panachaicus, Lampea, Pholoe, 
Parrhasius, and Taygetus, runs in a direction a little east of south 
from the 43nd parallel to the promontory of Taenarum. From this 
great longitudinal chain are thrown out, at brief intervals on either 
side, a series of lateral branches, having a general latitudinal direc- 
tion j from which again there start off other cross ranges, which 
follow the course of the main chain, or backbone of the region, 
pointing nearly south-east. The latitudinal chains are especially 
marked and important in the eastern division of the country, 
between Pindus and the iEgean. Here are thrown off, succes- 
sively, the Cambunian and Olympic range, which formed the 
northern boundary of Greece Proper; the range of Othrys, which 
separated Thessaly from Mails and ^Eniania ; that of CEta, which 
divided between Malis and Doris ; and that of Parnassus, Helicon, 
Cithseron, and Parnes, which, starting from near Delphi, terminated 
in the Rhamnusian promontory, opposite Eubcea, forming in its 
eastern portion a strong barrier between Boeotia and Attica. Of 
a similar character, on the opposite side, were Mount Lingus in 
Northern Epirus, which struck westward from Pindus at a point 
nearly opposite the Cambunians; together with Mount Tymph- 
restus in Northern, and Mount Bomius in Central ^Etolia. In the 
Peloponnese, the main chain, which stretched from Rhium to 
Tsenarum, threw off, on the west, Mount Scollis, which divided 
Achaea from Elis, and Mount Elseon, which separated Elis from 
Messenia ; while, towards the east, the lateral branches were, first, 
one which, under the names of Erymanthus, Aroania, and 
Cyllene, divided Achaea from Arcadia, and which was then pro- 
longed eastward to the Scyllsean promontory in Argolis ; and, 
secondly, Mount Parthenium, which intervened between Argolis 
and Laconia. Of secondary longitudinal chains the only ones 
which need special mention are the range of Pelion and Ossa, 



io8 GREECE. [book hi. 

which shut in Thessaly on the east ; that of Pentelicus, Hymettus, 
and Anhydrus in Attica ; and that of Parnon in the Peloponnese, 
which stretched from near Tegea to Malea. 

4. The mountain-chains of Greece occupy so large a portion of 
the area that but little is left for level ground or Plains. Still, 

a certain number of such spaces existed, and were 

The plains. , ,,/-,- • , rT-.i 

the more valued for their rarity. The greater por- 
tion of Thessaly was a vast plain, surrounded by mountains, and 
drained by a single river, the Peneus. In Boeotia there were two 
large plains, one the marshy plain of the Cephissus, much of which 
was occupied by Lake Copais ; and the other, the plain of Asopus, 
on the verge of which stood Thebes^ Thespise, and Platsea. Attica 
boasted of three principal plains, that of Eleusis, adjoining the 
city of the name, that of Athens itself, and that of Marathon. In 
Western and Southern Peloponnese were the lowlands of Cava Elis 
on either side of the Peneus river, of Macaria, about the mouth 
of the Pamisus, and of Helos, at the embouchure of the Eurotas ; in 
the central region were the high upland plains, or basins, of Tegea, 
Mantinea, Pheneus, and Orchomenus ; while Eastern Peloponnese 
boasted the fertile alluvium of Argos, watered by the Chimarrhus, 
Erasinus, Phrixus, Charadrus, and Inachus. 

5. The Rivers of Greece were numerous, but of small volume^ 
the majority being little more than winter torrents, and carrying 

little or no water in the summer time. The only 
streams of any real magnitude were the Acheloiis, 
which rose in Epirus, and divided ^tolia from Acarnaniaj the 
northern Peneus, which drained the great Thessalian plain ; and 
the Alpheus, the stream on whose banks stood Olympia. Among 
secondary rivers may be noticed the Thyamis, Oropus, and Arach- 
thus in Epirus ; the Evenus and Daphnus in ^tolia ; the Spercheius 
in Malis ; the Cephissus and Asopus in Boeotia ; the Peneus, Pa- 
misus, Eurotas, and Inachus in the Peloponnese. 

6. It is a characteristic of the Grecian rivers to disappear in 
Catabothra or subterraneous passages. The limestone rocks are 

The Cata- '^^ of caves and fissures, while the plains consist often 
bothra. of land-locked basins which present to the eye no 
manifest outlet. Here the streams commonly form lakes, the 
waters of which flow off through an underground channel, some- 
times visible, sometimes only conjectured to exist, to the sea. 
Instances of such visible outlets are those by which the Cephissus 



SECTS. 4-9.] GEOGRAPHICAL OUTLINE. 109 

finds an egress from Lake Copa'is in Boeotia (where art however 
has assisted nature), and those by which the superfluous waters are 
carried ofF from most of the lakes in the Peloponnese. Invisible 
channels are believed to give a means of escape to the waters of 
Lakes Hylice and Trephia in Boeotia. 

7. The Lakes of Greece are numerous^ but not very remarkable. 
The largest is Lake Copa'is in Boeotia, the area of which has been 
estimated at forty-one square miles. Next in size 

to this is, probably, Boebeis in Thessaly, formed e a- s. 
mainly by the overflowings of the Peneus. To these may be 
added Lake Pambotis in Epirus^ on the southern shores of which 
was the oracular shrine of Dodona j Lakes Trichonis and Conope 
in ^tolia, between the Evenus and Acheloiis ; Lake Nessonis, 
near Lake Boebeis in Thessaly j Lake Xynias, in Achaea Phthiotis ; 
the smaller Boeotian lakes, Hylice and Trephia j and the Arca- 
dian lakes of Pheneus^ Stymphalus, Orchomenus, Mantinea, and 
Tegea. 

8. It has been observed that the littoral islands of Greece were 
both numerous and important. The principal one was Euboea, 
which lay as a great breakwater along the whole jhe littoral 
east coast of Attica, Boeotia, and Locris, extending islands. 

in length rather more than 100 miles with an average breadth of 
about fifteen miles. Very inferior to this in size, but nearly 
equal in importance, was Corcyra, on the opposite or western 
side of the peninsula, which had a length of forty, and a breadth 
varying from fifteen to five miles. Besides these, there lay off the 
west coast Paxos, Leucas or Leucadia, Ithaca^ Cephallenia, and 
Zacynthus (now Zante) ; off the south, the QEnussas and Cythera ; 
off the east, Tiparenus, Hydria, Calauria, vEgina, Salamis, 
Cythnus, Ceos, Helene, Andros, Scyros, Peparethus, Halonnesus, 
and Sciathus. From the south-eastern shores of Euboea and 
Attica, the Cyclades and Sporades extended in a continuous 
series, like a set of stepping-stones, across the vEgean Sea to Asia. 
On the other side, from Corcyra and the Acroceraunian promon- 
tory, the eye could see, on a clear day, the opposite coast of Italy. 

9. The natural division of Greece is into Northern, Central, and 
Southern. Northern Greece extends from the north boundary-line 

< to the point where the eastern and western shores Natural 
are respectively indented by the Gulfs of Malis and divisions. 
Ambracia or Actium. Central Greece reaches from this point to 



no GREECE. [BOOK III. 

the Isthmus of Corinth. Southern Greece is identical with the 
Peloponnese. 

10. Northern Greece contained in ancient times two principal 
countries, Thessaly and Epirus, which were separated from each 

Northern Other by the high chain of Pindus. Besides these, 

Greece. there Were, on the eastern side of the mountain 

barrier. Magnesia and Achaea Phthiotis; and in the mountain 

region itself, half-way between the two gulfs, Dolopia, or the 

country of the Dolopes. 

11. Thessaly_, the largest and most fertile country of Greece 
Proper, was almost identical with the basin of the Peneus. It was 

_, , a region nearly circular in shape, with a diameter of 

Thessaly. ^ -^ , ,, , , . 

about seventy miles. Mountains surrounded it on 
every side, from which descended numerous streams, all of them 
converging, and flowing ultimately into the Peneus. The united 
waters passed to the sea through a single narrow gorge, the cele- 
brated vale of Tempe, which was said to have been caused by an 
earthquake. Thessaly was divided into four provinces : — [a) Per- 
rhsebia on the north, along the skirts of Olympus and the Cam- 
bunians; {b) Histiseotis, towards the west, on the flanks of Pindus, 
and along the upper course of the Peneus; {c) Thessaliotis, 
towards the south^ bordering on Achsea Phthiotis and Dolopia; 
and [d) Pelasgiotis, towards the east, between the Enipeus and 
Magnesia. Its chief cities were, in Perrhaebia, Gonni and Pha- 
lanna; in Histiseotis, Gomphi and Tricca; in Thessaliotis, 
Cierium and Pharsalus ; in Pelasgiotis, Larissa and Pherte. 

12. Epirus, the next largest country to Thessaly, was in shape 
an oblong square, seventy miles long from north to south, and 

about fifty-five miles across. It consisted of a series 
pirus. ^^ lofty mountains, twisted spurs from Pindus, with 
narrow valleys between, along the courses of the numerous streams. 
The main divisions were — on the east, Molossis; chief cities, 
Dodona, Ambracia : to the north-west, Chaonia ; cities, Phoenice, 
Buthrotum, Cestria : to the south-west, Thesprotia ; cities, Pan- 
dosia, Cassope, and in later times, Nicopolis. Epirus, during the 
real historical period, was Illyrian rather than Greek. 

13. Magnesia and Achaea Phthiotis are sometimes reckoned as 

. parts of Thessaly; but, in the early times at any 

rate, they were distinct countries. Magnesia was the 

coast-tract between the mouth of the Peneus and the Pagasaean 



SECTS. 10-17.] GEOGRAPHICAL OUTLINE. m 

Gulf, comprising the two connected ranges of Ossa and Pelion, 
with the country immediately at their base. It measured in length 
about sixty-five^ and in width from ten to fifteen miles. Its 
chief cities were Myrse, Meliboea, and Casthanaea upon the eastern 
coast j lolcus, in the Gulf of Pagasaej and Boebe, near Lake 
Boebei's, in the interior. Achsea Phthiotis was the tract imme- 
diately south of Thessaly, extending from the Paga- . , p. , . 
saean Gulf on the east to the part of Pindus inhabited otis. 

by the Dolopes. It was a region nearly square in shape, each side 
of the square measuring about thirty miles. It consisted of Mount 
Othrys, with the country at its base. The chief cities were 
Halos, Thebse Phthiotides, Itonus, Melitsea, Lamia, and Xyniae on 
Lake Xynias. 

14. Dolopia, or the country of the Dolopes^ comprised a portion 
of the range of Pindus, together with the more western part of 
Othrys, and the upper valleys of several streams 

which ran into the Acheloiis. It was a small tract, ° °^'^' 

not more than forty miles long by fifteen broad, and was very 
rugged and mountainous. 

15. Central Greece, or the tract intervening between Northern 
Greece and the Peloponnese, contained eleven coun- Centrai, 
tries ; viz. Acarnania^ ^Etolia, Western Locris, v^ni- Greece. 
ania^ Doris, Malis, Eastern Locris, Phocis, Boeotia, Attica, and 
Megaris. 

16. Acarnania, the most western of the countries, was a trian- 
gular tract, bounded on the north by the Ambracian 

Gulf, on the east by the Acheloiis, and on the south- 
west by the Adriatic. Its sides measured respectively fifty, thirty- 
five, and thirty miles. Its chief cities were, in the interior. 
Stratus • on the coast, Anactorium^ Solium, Astacus, and (Eniadae. 

17. iEtolia adjoined Acarnania on the east, and extended in 
that direction as far as iEniania and Doris. On the north it was 
bounded by Dolopia ; on the south by the Corinthian 

Gulf. In size it was about double Acarnania; and 
its area considerably exceeded that of any other country in this 
part of Hellas. It was generally mountainous^ but contained a" flat 
and marshy tract between the mouths of the Evenus and Acheloiis ; 
and somewhat further to the north, a large plain, in which were 
two great lakes, the Conope and the Trichonis. Its chief cities 
were Pleuron_, Calydon, and Thermon. 



112 GREECE. [BOOK iir. 

1 8. Western Locris, or the country of the Locri Ozolse, lay on 
Western ^^^ coast of the Corinthian Gulf, immediately to the 
Locris. east of ^tolia. Its length along the coast was about 

thirty-seven miles, and its depth inland from about two miles to 
twenty-three. Its chief cities were Naupactus on the coast, and 
Amphissa in the interior. 

19. ^Eniania, or vEtaea, as it was sometimes called, lay also east 
of ^Etolia, but towards the north, whereas Locris adjoined it towards 

^niania or ^^^^ south. ^Eniania was separated from ^tolia by 
^tsea. the continuation of Pindus southwards, and was 
bounded on the north by Othrys and on the south by QEta. It lay 
thus on the course of the upper Spercheius river. It was an oval- 
shaped country, about twenty-seven miles long by eighteen broad. 
The chief town was Hypata. 

30. Doris intervened between ^niania and Western Locris. 
This was a small and rugged country, inclosed between Mounts 

Parnassus and Callidromus, on the upper course of 
the Pindus river, a tributary of the Boeotian Cephissus. 
Its greatest length was about seventeen and its greatest width 
about ten miles. It contained the four cities of Pindus, Erineus, 
Boeum, and Cytinium, whence it was known as the Dorian 
Tetrapolis. 

31. Malis lay north of Doris, south of Achaea Phthiotis, and 
east of ^Eniania. It was even smaller than Doris, which it re- 
sembled in shape. • The greatest length was about 

Malis. -^ , , ^ . 1 , , . , 

titteen and the greatest width about eight miles. 
The chief cities were Anticyra and Trachis j and, in later times, 
Heraclea. At the extreme eastern edge of Malis, between the 
mountains and the sea, was the pass of Thermopylse. 

32. Eastern Locris lay next to Malis, along the shore of the 
Euripus or Euboean channel. It was politically divided into two 

Eastern parts, Epicnemidia and Opuntia; which, in later 
Locris. times, were physically separated by a small strip of 
ground, reckoned as belonging to Phocis. Epicnemidia extended 
about seventeen miles, from near Thermopylae to near Daphnus, 
averaging about eight miles in width. Its chief town was Cnemides. 
Opuntia reached from Alope to beyond the mouth of the Cephissus, 
a distance of twenty-six miles. Its width was about equal to that 
of Epicnemidia. It derived its name from its chief city. Opus. 

33. Phocis reached from Eastern Locris on the north to the 



SECTS. 18-25.] GEOGRAPHICAL OUTLINE. 113 

Corinthian Gulf on the south. It was bounded on the west by 
Doris and Western Locris, on the east by Boeotia. 
It was squarish in shape^ with an average length of 
twenty-five and an average breadth of twenty miles. The central 
and southern parts were extremely mountainous; but along the 
course of the Cephissus and its tributaries there were some fertile 
plains. The chief cities were Delphi, on the southern flank of 
Mount Parnassus, Elatsea, Parapotamii, Panopeus, Abse, famous for 
its temple, and Hyampolis. 

34. Boeotia was above twice the size of Phocis, having a 
length of fifty and an average breadth of twenty-three miles. It 
was generally flat and marshy, but contained the 

.• rTTi- , , ,, Boeotia. 

mountam range of Helicon on the south, and the 
lofty hills known as Ptoiis, Messapius, Hypatus, and Teumessus, 
towards the more eastern portion of the country. The Lake Copai's 
covered an area of forty-one square miles, or above one-thirtieth 
of the surface. There were also two smaller lakes between Copai's 
and the Eubcean Sea, called respectively Hylice and Trephia. The 
chief rivers of Boeotia were (besides the Cephissus, which entered 
it from Phocis) the Asopus, the Termessus, the Thespius, and 
the Oeroe. Boeotia was noted for the number and greatness of its 
cities. The chief of these was Thebes ; but the following were 
also of importance : Orchomenus, Thespiae, Tanagra, Coronsea, 
Lebadeia, Haliartus, Chaeroneia, Leuctra, and Copae. 

25. Attica was the foreland or peninsula which projected from 
Boeotia to the south-east. Its length, from Cithaeron to Sunium, 
was seventy miles ; its greatest width, from Munychia . 

to Rhamnus, was thirty miles. Its area has been esti- 
mated at 720 square miles, or about one-fourth less than Boeotia. 
The general character of the tract was mountainous and infertile. 
On the north, Cithseron, Parnes, and Phelleus formed a continuous 
line running nearly east and west; from this descended three 
spurs : one, which divided Attica from the Megarid, known as 
Kerata; another, which separated the Eleusinian from the Athe- 
nian plain, called vEgaleos; and the third, which ran out from 
Parnes by Decelea and Marathon to Cape Zoster, named in the 
north Pentelicus, in the centre Hymettus, and near the south 
coast Anhydrus. The towns of Attica, except Athens, were unim- 
portant. Its rivers, the two Cephissuses, the Ilissus, the Erasinus, 
and the Charadrus, were little more than torrent courses. 

I 



114 GREECE. [BOOK HI. 

%6. Megaris, which adjoined on Attica to the west, occupied 
the northern portion of the Isthmus uniting Central Greece with 
the Peloponnese. It was the smallest of all the 
central Greek countries, excepting Doris and Malis, 
being about fourteen miles long by eleven broad, and containing 
less than 150 square miles. It had one city only, viz. Megara, 
with the ports Nissea and Pegae. 

37. Southerii Greece, or the Peloponnese, contained eleven 
Southern countries, viz. Corinth, Sicyon, Achaea, Elis, Arca- 

Greece. jjia^^ Messenia, Laconia, Argolis, Epidauria, Troe- 
zenia, and Hermionis. 

38. The territory of Corinth adjoined Megaris, and included 
the larger portion of the Isthmus, together with a tract of some- 
what greater magnitude in the Peloponnese. Its 

^^^ ' greatest length was twenty-five and its greatest 
width about twenty-three miles. Its shape, however, was ex- 
tremely irregular; and its area cannot be reckoned at more than 
230 square miles. The only city of importance was Corinth, the 
capital, which had a port on either sea — on the Corinthian Gulf, 
Lechseum, and on the Saronic Gulf, Cenchrese. 

29. Sicyon, or Sicyonia, adjoined Corinth on the west. It lay 

along the shore of the Corinthian Gulf for a distance 
icyoma. ^^ about fifteen miles, and extended inland about 
twelve or thirteen miles. It contained but one city, viz. Sicyon. 

30. Achasa came next to Sicyonia, and extended along the 
coast a distance of about sixty-five miles. Its average width was 

about ten miles ; and its area may be reckoned at 
650 square miles. It contained twelve cities, of 

which Dyme, Patrae (now Patras), and Pellene were the most 

important. 

31. Elis lay on the west coast of the Peloponnese, extending 
from the mouth of the Larisus to that of the Neda, a distance of 

fifty-seven miles, and reaching inland to the foot of 
Erymanthus, about twenty-five miles. It was a more 
level country than was common in Greece, containing broad tracts 
of plain along the coast, and some tolerably wide valleys along the 
courses of the Peneus, Alpheus, and Neda rivers. Its chief cities 
were Elis on the Peneus, the port Cyllene on the gulf of the same 
name, Olympia and Pisa on the Alpheus, and Lepreum in Southern 
Elis or Triphylia. 



SECTS. 26-34.] GEOGRAPHICAL OUTLINE. 115 

32. Arcadia was the central mountain country — the Switzer- 
land — of the Peloponnese. It reached from the mountain-chain of 
Erymanthus, Aroania, and Cyllene in the north, to , •,• 

the sources of the Alpheus towards the south, a dis- 
tance of about sixty miles. The average width was about forty 
miles. The area is reckoned at 1700 square miles. The country 
is for the most part a mountainous table-land, the rivers of which, 
excepting towards the west and the south-west, are absorbed in 
catabothruj and have no visible outlet to the sea. High plains and 
small lakes are numerous ; but by far the greater part of the area 
is occupied by mountains and narrow but fertile valleys. Im- 
portant cities were numerous. Among them may be named 
Mantinea, Tegea, Orchomenus, Pheneus, Heraea, Psophis, and, 
in the later times, Megalopolis. 

33. Messenia lay south of Elis and Western Arcadia, occupying 

the most westerly of the three forelands in which the Peloponnese 

terminates, and circlins round the gulf between this 

' ° ° Messenia. 

foreland and the central one as far as the mouth of 
the Cboerius. Its length, from the Neda to the promontory of 
Acritas, was forty-five miles j its greatest width between Laconia 
and the western coast was thirty-seven miles. The area is esti- 
mated at 1 1 60 square miles. Much of the country was moun- 
tainous j but along the course of the main river, the Pamisus, 
were some broad plains j and the entire territory was fertile. The 
original capital was Stenyclerus ; but afterwards Messene, on the 
south-western flank of Mount Ithome, became the chief town. 
Other important places were Eira on the upper Neda, Pylus (now 
Navarino), and Methone, south of Pylus (now Modon). 

34. Laconia embraced the two other Peloponnesian forelands, 
together with a considerable tract to the north of them. Its 
greatest length, between Argolis and the promontory 

of Malea^ was nearly eighty miles, while its greatest 
width was not much short of fifty miles. The area approached 
nearly to 1900 square miles. The country consisted mainly of a 
single narrowish valley — that of the Eurotas — enclosed between 
two lofty mountain -ranges — those of Parnon and Taygetus. 
Hence the expression, ' Hollow Lacedaemon.' Sparta, the capital, 
lay on the Eurotas, at the distance of about twenty miles from the 
sea. The other towns were unimportant; the chief were Gythium 
and Thyrea on the coast, and Sellasia in the valley of the JEnxxs. 

I 2 



ii6 GREECE. [BOOK III. 

•3^^^. Argolis is a term sometimes applied to the whole tract 
projecting eastward from Achaea and Arcadia, with the exception 
of the small territory of Corinth : but the word will 
be here used in a narrower sense. Argolis Proper 
was bounded by Sicyonia and Corinthia on the north, by Epidaurus 
on the east, by Cynuria — a portion of Laconia — on the south, and 
by Arcadia on the west. Its greatest extent from north to south 
was about thirty, and from east to west about thirty-one miles. 
Its entire area did not exceed 700 square miles. Like the rest of 
the Peloponnese, it was mountainous, but contained a large and 
rich plain at the head of the Argolic Gulf. Its capital was, in 
early times, Mycense; afterwards Argos. Other cities of im- 
portance were Phlius, Cleonse, and Tiryns. The port of Argos 
was Nauplia. 

-^6. Epidauria lay east of Argolis, east and south of Corinthia. 
Its length from north to south was about twenty- 

Epidauria. ,, ., , . , , v • i • i- 

three miles, and its breadth in the opposite direction 
about eight miles. It contained but one city of any note, viz. 
Epidaurus, the capital. 

37. Troezenia adjoined Epidauria on the south-east. It com- 
prised the north-eastern half of the Argolic foreland, together with 

the rocky peninsula of Methana. Its greatest length 
Troezenia. . ., . . ... ... 

was sixteen miles, and its greatest width, excluding 

Methana, nine miles. It contained two cities of note, Troezen 

and Methana. 

38. Hermionis adjoined Epidauria on the north and Troezenia 

oh the east. It formed the western termination of 
the Argolic foreland. In size it was about equal to. 

Troezenia. It contained but one town of any consequence, viz. 

Hermione. 

39. Besides the littoral islands of Greece, which have been 
already enumerated, there were several others, studding the 

iEgean Sea, which deserve notice • as particularly 
the following : — [a) In the Northern ./Egean, Lem- 
nos, Imbrus, Thasos, and Samothrace. (^) In the Central 
^gean, besides Andros, Ceos, and Cythnus, which may be called 
littoral, Tenos, Syros, Gyarus, Delos, Myconus, Naxos, Paros, 
Siphnus, MeloS;, Thera, Amorgus, &c. (c) In the Southern 
T^gean, Crete. This last-named island was of considerable 
size. It extended from west to east a distance of 150 miles. 



PEE. I.] EARLY HISTORY. 117 

and had an average width of about fifteen miles. The area con- 
siderably exceeded 2000 square miles. The chief cities were 
Cydonia and Gnossus on the north coast, and Gortyna in the 
interior. The whole island was mountainous but fertile. 

On the character of the Greek Islands, see the work of 

Ross, L., Reisen auf den Griechischen Inseln. Stuttgart, 1840-52 ; 3 vols. 8vo. 

On the general geography of Greece, the following may be con- 
sulted with advantage : — 

Kruse, F. G. H., Hellas. Leipsic, 1825-27; 3 vols. 8vo. A general de- 
scription of the geography of Greece from the best sources existing at the 
time. Still of value to the student. 

Cramer, J. A., Geographical and Historical Description of Ancient Greece. 
Oxford, 1828; 3 vols. 8vo. 

Leake, Col., Tra'vels in Northern Greece. London, 1835 ; 4 vols. 8vo. 
„ „ tra'vels in the Morea. London, 1830; 3 vols. 8vo. 

„ „ Peloponnesiaca, supplemental to the Travels in the Morea. Lon- 

don, 1846 ; 8vo. 

CURTIUS, E., Peloponnesus. Gotha, 185 1-2 ; 2 vols. 8vo. 

Clark, W. G., Peloponnesus, Notes of Study and Travel. London, 1858 ; 8vo. 

NiEBUHR, B. G., Lectures on the Ethnography and Geography of Ancient Greece, 
edited by L. Schmitz. London, 1853 ; 2 vols. 8vo. ; from the German edition 
of Dr. ISLER. 

Concerning the Greek islands oflF the coast of Asia Minor, see 
above, Book I. Part I. A (p. 16). 



SKETCH OF THE HISTORY. 



FIRST PERIOD. 

The Ancient Traditional History, from the Earliest Times to the Dorian 
Occupation of the Peloponnese, about B.C. iioo to 1000. 

Sources. Native only, (a) Homer. The two poems, which pass under 
this venerable name, whatever their actual origin, must always continue to 
be, on account of their great antiquity, the prime authority for the early 
condition of things in Greece. Modern criticism agrees with ancient in 
viewing them as the earliest remains of Greek literature that have come 
down to us; and, if their actual date is about B.C. 850, as now generally 
believed, they must be regarded as standing apart on a vantage-ground 
of their own ; for we have nothing else continuous or complete in Greek 
literature for nearly four centuries. (^) Herodotus. This writer, though 
the immediate subject of his history is the great Persian War, yet carries 
us back in the episodical portions of his work to very remote times, and 
is entitled to consideration as a careful inquirer into the antiquities of many 
nations, his own among the number, (c) Thucydides. The sketch, with 
which the history of Thucydides opens, a masterly production, gives the 
judgment of a shrewd and well-read Athenian of the fourth century B.C. on 
the antiquities of Greece. (</) Diodorus Siculus collected from previous 



ii8 GREECE. [BOOK III. 

writers, particularly Ephorus and Timseus, the early traditional history of 
Greece, and related it in his fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh books ; of these 
the fourth and lifth remain, while the other two are lost, excepting a few 
fragments, {e) Much interesting information on the early history of Greece 
is contained in the geographers, as particularly in Strabo, Pausanias, and 
Scymnus Chius. Of Plutarch's Lives one only, that of Theseus, belongs to 
the early period. 

Among modem works treating of this time may be mentioned 
the following : — 

Heeren, a. H. L., Ideen uber die Politik, &c., vol. vi. Gottingen, 1826. 
Translated into English by Talboys. Oxford, 1830; 8vo. 

NiEBUHR, B. G., Fortrdge uber alte Geschichte. Berlin, 1847 ; 3 vols. 8vo. 
Translated into English, with additions and corrections, by Dr. L. Schmitz. 
London, 1852. 

MiJLLER, K. O., Orchomenus und die Minyer. Breslau, 1820 ; 8vo. 

„ „ Die Dorter. Breslau, 1825; 2 vols. 8vo. Translated into 

English by Sir G, C. Lewis. Oxford, 1830. 

Clinton, H. F., Fasti Helknici. Oxford, 1830-41 ; 3 vols. 4to. The 
' Introduction ' to the first volume bears particularly on this period. 

Thirl WALL, Bp., History of Greece, vol. i. chaps, ii. to vii. 

Grote, G., History of Greece, vol. i. chaps, i. to xx. 

The value to be placed on the general historical narrative belonging to 
these early times will depend, (i) on the view which is taken of the proba- 
bility of oral traditions handing down correctly the general outline of events 
of national importance ; and (2) on the question at what time historical 
events began to be contemporaneously recorded in inscriptions, or otherwise, 
by the Greeks. On the latter point, the student may compare the nineteenth 
chapter of Mr. Grote's History of Greece with Mr. CLINTON'S ' Introduction,' 
and with Col. Mure's Remarks on tnvo Appendices to Grote's History of Greece. 
London, 1851. 

I. The Greeks of the historical times seem to have had no 

traditions of a migration from Asia. Their ancestors, they held. 

Earliest ^^^ always been in the country, though they had 

INHABITANTS not always been called Hellenes. Greece had been 

inhabited from a remote age by races more or less 

homogeneous, and more or less closely allied with their own — 

Pelasffi, Leleges, Curetes, Caucones, Aones, Dolopes, 

^''-^' ^- Dryopes, and the like. Of these, the Pelasgi had 

been the most important. The Hellenes proper had originally 

been but one tribe out of many cognate ones. 

They had dwelt in Achsea Phthiotis, or, according 

to others, near Dodona, and had originally been insignificant in 

numbers and of small account. In process of time, however, 

they acquired a reputation above that of the other tribes; 

recourse was had to them for advice and aid in circumstances 

of difficulty ; other tribes came over to them, adopted their name, 

their form of speech, and the general character of their civilisa- 



PEE. I.] CHIEF RACES. 119 

tion. The growth and spread of the Hellenes was thus not by 
conquest but by influence; they did not overpower or expel the 
Pelasgi, Leleges, &c., but gradually assimilated them. 

Characteristics of the Pelasgie, or ante-Hellenic Period. 1. Time of 
peace — golden age of the poets. 2. General pursuit of agriculture. 3. Archi- 
tecture massive and with little ornament. 4. Religion simple — no names of 
distinct gods. National sanctuary at Dodona. 

2. The original Hellenic tribes seem to have been two only, 
the Dorians and the Achaeans, of whom the latter preponderated 
in the more ancient times. Settled in Achaea 

Phthiotis from a remote antiquity, they were also, tribes: 
before the Dorian occupation, the leading race of ^- Ach^eans. 

1, Dorians. 

the Peloponnese. Here they are said to have had 
three kingdoms — those of Argos_, Mycenae, and Sparta — which 
attained to a considerable degree of prosperity and civilisation. 
The Dorians were reported to have dwelt originally with the 
Achseans in Phthiotis j but their earliest ascertained locality was 
the tract on the Upper Pindus which retained the name of Doris 
down to Roman times. In this ^ small and sad region' they grew 
to greatness, increasing in numbers, acquiring martial habits, and 
perhaps developing a peculiar discipline. 

3. The most important of the Pelasgie tribes was that of the 
lonians, which occupied in the earliest times the whole north 
coast of the Peloponnese, the Megarid, Attica, and 

Euboea. Another (so-called) tribe (which is, how- tribes: 
ever, perhaps, only a convenient designation under ^- ^^^^y^"^- 
which to include such inhabitants of the country 
as were not Achaean, Dorian, or Ionian) was that of the ^Eolians, 
to which the Thessalians, Boeotians, ^Etolians, Locrians, Phocians, 
Eleans, Pylians, &c., were regarded as belonging. These races 
having been gradually Hellenized, the entire four tribes came 
to be regarded as Hellenic, and a mythic genealogy was framed 
to express at once the ethnic unity and the tribal diversity of the 
four great divisions of the Hellenic people. 

Hellen 



I r- : 1 

DORUS XUTHUS .^OLUS 

f L _, 

AcHiEus Ion. 

4. According to the traditions of the Greeks, some important 
foreign elements were received into the nation during the period 



I20 GREECE. [BOOK III. 

of which we are treating. Egyptians settled in Attica and 
Foreign Argolis j Phoenicians in Boeotia; and Mysians, or 
settlers Phrvffians, at Arsos. The civilisation of the settlers 

111 (jrreece. y d ? d 

Benefits was higher than that of the people among whom 
from trem. 'they settled, and some considerable benefits were 

Letters. obtained from these foreign sources. Among them 
may be especially mentioned letters, which were derived from the 
Phoenicians, probably anterior to B.C. iioo. Although writing 
for some centuries after its introduction was not much used, yet 
its occasional employment, especially for public purposes, was 
an important check upon the erratic tendencies of oral tradition. 
Inscriptions on the offerings in temples, and registers of the suc- 
cession of kings and sacerdotal persons, were among the earliest 
of the Greek historical documents • and though there is no actual 
proof that they reached back as far as this ' First Period,' yet there 
is certainly no proof of the contrary, and many of the best critics 
believe in the public employment of writing in Greece thus early. 

On this interesting question see, on the one side, Mr. Fynes Clinton in 
the ' Introduction' to vol. i. of his Fasti Hellenici, and K. O. Muller, Dorians, 
vol. i. pp. 147-156; and, on the other, Mr. Grote in his History of Greece, 
vol i. chap. xix. 

5. But, whatever benefits were derived by the Greeks from the 

foreigners who settled among them, it is evident that neither the 

Greek purity of their race, nor the general character and 

cmhsation course of their civilisation, was much affected by 

in the mam 

of home extraneous influences. The incomers were com- 
growth. paratively few in number, and were absorbed into 
the Hellenic nation without leaving anything more than a faint 
trace of themselves upon the language, customs, or religion of the 
people which received them into its bosom. Greek civilisation 
was in the main of home growth. Even the ideas adopted from 
without acquired in the process of reception so new a stamp as 
to become almost original ; and the Greek people must be held to 
have, on the whole, elaborated for themselves that form of civilisa- 
tion, and those ideas on the subjects of art, politics, morals, and 
religion, which have given them their peculiar reputation. 

Egyptian settlement at Athens traceable in the deities Athene (Neith) and 
Hephsestus (Phtha) ; in the early Athenian caste-tribes ; and, perhaps, in the 
special religiousness (SftcrtSat/xoi/t'a) of the Athenians. Phoenician settlement 
at Thebes traceable in the proper names, Cadmeians, Cadmeia, and Onca, 
and in such words as epe^os, 'EXtevy, ^dwa, dxavrj, aida, k.t.X. Settlements of 
Danaus and Pelops in the Peloponnese not traceable. 



PER. I.] EARLY CONDITION OF SOCIETY. 121 

6. History proper can scarcely be regarded as corrimencing until 
the very close of the period now under consideration, when we 
first meet with names which have some claim to j^. ^^^ 

be regarded as those of actual personages. But proper of 
the general condition of the people at the period, ^^ ^^'^° 
and some of the movements of the races, and even their causes, 
may be laid down with an approach to certainty. 

7. The Homeric poems represent to us the general state of 
Greek society in the earliest times. The most noticeable features 
are: — id) The predominance of the tribe or nation „ , , , 

\ I ^ _ (jreneral state 

over the city, which exists indeed, but has nowhere of Greek 
the monopoly of political life. (^) The universality of society. 
kingly government, which is hereditary and based upon the notion 
of 'divine right.' ic) The existence of a hereditary nobility of 
a rank not much below that of the king^ who form his council 
{^Qv\y]) both in peace and war, but exercise no effectual control 
over his actions, {d) The existence of an assembly [hyopa) which 
is convened by the king, or, in his absence^ by one of the chiefs, 
to receive communications, and witness trials, but not either to 
advise or judge, {e) The absence of polygamy, and the high 
regard in which women are held. (/) Slavery everywhere estab- 
lished, and considered to be right. (^) Perpetual wars, not only 
between the Greeks and neighbouring barbarians, but between the 
various Greek tribes and nations ; preference of the military virtues 
over all others ; excessive regard for stature and physical strength. 
{h) Wide prevalence of nautical habits combined with a disinclina- 
tion to venture into unknown seas ; dependence of the Greeks on 
foreigners for necessary imports. Piracy common ; cities built at 
a distance from the sea from fear of pirates, {i) Strong religious 
feeling; belief in polytheism, in fate, in the divine Nemesis, and 
the punishment of heinous crimes by the Furies. Respect for the 
priestly character, for heralds, guests, and suppliants. Peculiar 
sanctity of temples and festival seasons. 

8. The religious sentiment, always strong in the Greek mind, 
formed in the early times one of the most important of the bonds 
of union, which held men, and even tribes, together. Religion 
Community of belief led to community of worship ; ^ bond of 
and temples came to be frequented by all the tribes Amphi'c- 
dwelling around them, who were thus induced to tyomes. 
contract engagements with one another, and to form leagues of 



122 GREECE. [BOOK III. 

a peculiar character. These leagues, known as Amphictyonies, 
were not political alliances, much less confederations ; they were, 
in their original conception, limited altogether to religious pur- 
poses ; the tribes, or states, contracting them, bound themselves 
to protect certain sacred buildings^ rites, and persons^ but under- 
took no other engagements towards one another. The most noted 
of these leagues was that whereof the oracular shrine of Delphi 
was the centre j which acquired its peculiar dignity and import- 
ance, not so much from the wealth and influence of the Delphic 
temple^ as from the fact that among its twelve constituent 
members were included the two leading races of Greece. 

Constitution of the Delphic Amphictyony. Its twelve members were the 
Thessalians, the Boeotians, the Dorians, the lonians, the Perrhaebians, the 
Magnetes, the Locrians, the CEteeans or -iEnianians, the Achaeans of Phthia, 
the Phocians, the Dolopians, and the Malians. All the twelve members were 
equal. Meetings were held twice a year, once at Thermopylae and once at 
Delphi. Deputies (called Pylagorae and Hieromnemones) represented the 
tribes. 

9. Important movements of some of the principal races seem to 

have taken place towards the close of the early period. It may be 

suspected that these had their origin in the pressure 

migratoiy Upon North- Western Greece of the Illyrian people, 

"^aWby ^^^ parent (probably) of the modern Albanians. 

barbaric The tribes to the west of Pindus were always 

piessuie. regarded as less Hellenic than those to the east; and 

the ground of distinction seems to have been the greater Illyrian 

element in that quarter. The Trojan War, if a real event, may 

have resulted from the Illyrian pressure, being an endeavour to 

obtain a vent for a population, cramped for room, in the most 

accessible part of Asia. To the same cause may be assigned the 

great movement which, commencing in Epirus (about B.C. 1200), 

produced a general shift of the populations of Northern and 

Central Hellas. Quitting Thesprotia in Epirus, the Thessalians 

crossed the Pindus mountain-chain, and descending on the fertile 

valley of the Peneus, drove out the Boeotians, and occupied it. 

The Boeotians proceeded southwards over Othrys and CEta into 

the plain of the Cephissus, and driving out the Cadmeians and 

Minyans, acquired the territory to which they thenceforth gave 

name. The Cadmeians and JVlinyse dispersed, and are found in 

Attica, in Lacedsemon, and elsewhere. The Dorians at the same 

time moved from their old home and occupied Dryopis, which 



PER. T.] MIGRATIONS. 123 

thenceforward was known as Doris, expelling the Dryopians, who 
fled by sea and found a refuge in Euboea, in Cythnus, and in the 
Peloponnese. 

10. Not many years later a further, but apparently distinct, 

movement took place. The Dorians^ cramped for room in their 

narrow valleys between (Eta and Parnassus, having 

11- 1 1 1 -1 1 • -11 , 7I-I Second move- 

allied themselves with their neighbours, the ^to- ment : migra- 

lians, crossed the Corinthian Gulf at its narrowest tionofthe 

^ Dorians. 

point, between Rhium and Antirrhium, and effected 
a lodgment in the Peloponnese. Elis, Messenia, Laconia, and 
Argolis were successively invaded, and at least partially con- 
quered. Elis being assigned to the vEtolians, Dorian kingdoms 
were established in the three other countries. The previous 
Achsean inhabitants in part submitted, in part fled northwards, 
and occupied the north coast of the Peloponnese, dispossessing the 
lonians, who found a temporary refuge in Attica. 

11. A further result followed from the migrations and con- 
quests here spoken of. The population of Greece, finding the 
continent too narrow for it, was forced to flow out consequences : 
into the islands of the Mediterranean and the shores . settlements 
to which those islands conducted. The Boeotian in Asia, and' 
occupation of the plain of the Cephissus led to the ^" ^*^^y- 
first Greek settlements in Asia, those known as yEolian, in Lesbos 
and on the adjacent coast. The Achsean conquest of Ionia caused 
the lonians, after a brief sojourn in Attica, to pass on through the 
Cyclades, to Chios, Samos, and the parts of Asia directly opposite. 
Finally, the success of the Dorians against the Achseans caused 
these last to emigrate, in part to Asia under Doric leaders, in 
part to Italy. 

For the history of these settlements, see the following section. 



SECOND PERIOD. 

From the Dorian Conquest of the Peloponnese {about B.C. 1 100- 1000) to 
the commencement of the Wars with Persia, b.c. 500. 

Sources. No extant Greek writer gives us the continuous history of this 
period, which has to be gathered from scattered notices in Herodotus, Thucy- 
dides, Strabo, Pausanias, Plutarch, and other authors. The books of Diodorus 
which treated of this period are lost. Some important light is thrown on it 
by the fragments which remain of contemporary poets, e.g. Tyrtaeus, Cal- 
linus, and Solon. 



124 GRECIAN STATES, [book iii. 

Among modern works embracing the period the most important are the 
Histories of Thirwall and Grote ; to which may be added : — 

WaCHSMUTH, Hellenische Alterthumskunde. Halle, 1826 ; 4 vols. 8vo. 

TiTTMANN, Griechische Staatsverfassung. Leipsic, 1822. 

Hermann, K. F., Lehrbuch der Griechischen Staatsaltertbumer. Heidelberg, 
1831; Bvo. Translated into English by Talboys. Oxford, 1836. 

Niebuhr, B. G., Fortrdge, &c. Lectures xxiv. to xxxiv. 

Rawlinson, G., History of Herodotus. 4 vols. 2nd edition. London, 1862. 
Two appendices to Book V. belong especially to this period. 



PART L 

History of the principal Hellenic States in Greece Proper, 

I. The history of the Hellenes subsequently to the Dorian 

occupation of the Peloponnese resolves itself into that of the 

„ several states. StilL a few general remarks may be 

Consequences 30 y 

of the great made before proceeding to the special history of the 

migrations : . . . -.• j j. • , \ t'i 

1. Check to niore important cities and countries, (a) Ine pro- 
civilisation, gress of civilisation was, for a time and to a certain 

extent, checked by the migrations and the troubles which they 
brought in their train. Stronger and more energetic but ruder 
races took the place of weaker but more polished ones. Physical 
qualities asserted a superiority over grace, refinement, and in- 
genuity. What the rough Dorians were in comparison with the 
re fined Achteans of the Peloponnese, such were generally the con- 
quering as compared with the conquered peoples. (^) But against 
this loss must be set the greater political vigour of 

2. Increase or o 

of political the new era. War and movement, bringing out the 
vigour. personal qualities of each individual man, favoured 
the growth of self-respect and self-assertion. Amid toils and 
dangers which were shared alike by all, the idea of political 
equality took its rise. A novel and unsettled state of things 
stimulated political inventiveness ; and, various expedients being 
tried, the stock of political ideas increased rapidly. The simple 
hereditary monarchy of the heroic times was succeeded every- 
where, except in Epirus, by some more complicated system of 
government — some system far more favourable to freedom and to 
the political education of the individual, (c) Another natural 

consequence of the new condition of things was the 
3. Importance ^ ^ 

acquired by change by which the City acquired its special dignity 

^^^^^" and importance. The conquerors naturally settled 

themselves in some stronghold, and kept together for their greater 



PER. II. PART I.] ARGOS. 125 

security. Each such stronghold became a separate state, holding 
in subjection a certain tract of circumjacent country. Nm-nher f 
At the same time, the unconquered countries also, separate 
seeing the strength that resulted from unity, were 
induced in many cases to abolish their old system of village life 
and to centralise themselves by establishing capitals, and transfer- 
ring the bulk of their population to them (oruyoiKtVets). This was 
the case with Athens, Mantinea, Tegea, Dyme, &c. {d) In 
countries occupied by a single race, but broken up „ 
into many distinct states, each centralised in a single of confedera- 
city, the idea of political confederation grew up, 
sometimes (it may be) suggested by a pre-existing amphictyony, 
but occasionally, it would seem, without any such preparative. 
The federal bond was in most cases weakj and in Boeotia alone 
was the union such as to constitute permanently a state of first-rate 
importance. 

On the confederations of Greece, see Mr. E. A. Freeman's History of Federal 
Government, Yo\.i. London, 1863. 

2. The subdivision of Greece into a vast number of small states, 
united by no common political bond, and constantly at war with 
one another, did not prevent the formation and 
maintenance of a certain general Pan-Hellenic feel- Greece : its 
ing — a consciousness of unity, a friendliness, and causes. 

a readiness to make common cause against a foreign enemy. At 
the root of this feeling lay a conviction of identity of race. It 
was further fostered by the possession of a common language and 
a common literature j of similar habits and ideas ; and of a com- 
mon religion, of rites, temples, and festivals, which were equally 
open to all. 

Among the various unifying influences here mentioned, probably the most 
important were the common Hterature, more especially the poems of Homer, 
and the common festivals, more especially those known as the Great Games. 
Homer's grandest and most popular poem represented the Greeks as all en- 
gaged in a common enterprise against a foreign power. The Great Games 
gave to each Greek either one or two occasions in each year when he could 
meet all other Greeks in friendly rivalry, and join with them both in religious 
ceremonies and in amusements. On this subject consult 

ManSO, Ueber den Antheil der Griechen an den Olympischen Spielen. Breslau, 
1772. 

3. The first state which attained to political importance under 
the new condition of aflPairs in Greece was Argos. From Argos, 
according to the tradition, went forth the Dorian colonists, who 



126 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

formed settlements in Epidaurus, Troezen, Phlius, Sicyon, and 

Corinth ; while from some of these places a fur- 

Argos; her ther extension of Doric power was made, as from 

early pre- Epidaurus, which colonised ^Effina and Epidaurus 

eminence. ^ ' o i 

Limera, and from Corinth which colonised Megara. 
Argos, the prolific mother of so many children, stood to most of 
them in the relation of protectress, and almost of mistress. Her 
dominion reached, on the one hand, to the isthmus ; on the other, 
to Cape Malea and the island of Cythera. For three or four 
centuries, from the Dorian conquest to the death of Pheidon 
(about B.C. 744), she was the leading power of the Peloponnese, 
a fact which she never forgot, and which had an important in- 
fluence on her later history. 

4. The government of Argos was at the first a monarchy of the 
heroic type, the supreme power being hereditary in the house of the 

Changes in Temenidse, supposed descendants from Temenus the 
government. Heracleid, the eldest of the sons of Aristomachus. 
It was not long, however, before aspirations after political liberty 
arose, and, the power of the kings being greatly curtailed, a 
government, monarchical in form, but republican in reality, was 
established. This state of things lasted for some centuries j but, 
about B.C. 780 to 770, on the accession of a monarch of more than 
ordinary capacity, a certain Pheidon, a reaction set in. Pheidon 
not only recovered all the lost royal privileges, but, 
Pheidon, B.C. exceeding them, constituted himself the first known 
780-744. Grecian ' tyrant.' A great man in every way, he 
enabled Argos to exercise something like a practical hegemony 
over the whole Peloponnese. Under him, probably, were sent 
forth the colonies which carried the Argive name to Crete, 
Rhodes, Cos, Cnidus, and Halicarnassus. The connection thus 
established with Asia led him to introduce into Greece coined 
money — a Lydian invention — and a system of weights and mea- 
sures (<E>et8o)z;eta ixirpa) believed to have been identical with the 
Babylonian. 

5. After the death of Pheidon, Argos declined in power j the 
ties uniting the confederacy became relaxed j the government 

returned to its previous form; and the history of 

the Argive the state is almost a blank. No doubt the develop- 

power. nient of Spartan power was the main cause of this. 

decline ; but it may be attributed also, in part, to the lack of 



PEK. II. PART I.] SPARTA. 127 

eminent men, and in part to the injudicious severity with which 

Argos treated her perioecic cities and her confederates. 

Petty wars of Argos with Sparta terminate (about B.C. 554) with the loss 
of the region called Gynuria, or the Thyreatis. Was the occupation by Sparta 
of the tract east of Parnon anterior or subsequent to this ? 

6. Among the other states of Greece, the two whose history is 
most ample and most interesting, even during this early period, 
are undoubtedly Sparta and Athens. Every ' History of Greece' 
must mainly concern itself with the affairs of these two states, 
which are alone capable of being treated with anything like com- 
pleteness. 

History of Sparta. 

Authorities. Besides the general treatment of the subject in Histories of 
Greece, special works have been written on the History of Sparta, e.g. 

GragIUS, De Republica Lacedcemoniorum libri quatuor. Genevae, 1593 ; 4to. 

Meursius, De Regno Laconico libri duo. Ultraj., 1687 ; 4to. And Miscel- 
lanea Laconica. Amstel., 1 661; 4to. 

Manso, J. C. F., Sparta; ein Versuch zur Aufkl'drung der Gesckichte und 
Verfassung dieses Staates. Leipsic, 1800; 3 vols. 8vo, By far the most im- 
portant work on the subject. Excellent for the time at which it was Avritten, 
and still of great value to the student. 

Engel, C., De Republica militari, sive comparatio Lacedamoniorum, Cretensium, 
et Cosaccorum. Gottingen, 1790. 

7. The Dorians, who in the eleventh century effected a lodg- 
ment in the upper valley of the Eurotas, occupied at first a narrow 
space between Taygetus and Parnon, extending 

■, , r 11 History of 

northwards no further than the various head-streams Sparta. Long 
of the Eurotas and ^nus rivers, and southwards ^^^if dS^^^ 
only to a little beyond Sparta. This was a tract 
about twenty-five miles long by twenty broad, the area of which 
might be 400 square miles. In the lower valley, from a little 
below Sparta to the sea, the Achgeans still maintained themselves, 
having their capital at Amyclae, on the Eurotas, within two miles 
of the chief city of their enemies. Perpetual war went on between 
the two powers ; but Sparta for the space of three centuries made 
little or no advance southwards. Amy else commanding the valley, 
and the fortifications of Amyclae defying her incessant attacks. 
Baffled in this quarter, she made attempts to reduce ^r^^^g ^^^^i 
Arcadia, which failed, and even picked quarrels with Arcadia, 
her kindred states, Messenia and Argos, which led to Argos'. 
petty wars of no consequence. 

8. The government of Sparta during this period underwent 



128 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

changes akin to those which took place in Argos. The monarchs 
Internal Were at first absolute ; but discontent soon mani- 
troubles. fasted itself: concessions were made which were 
again revoked ; and the whole period was one of internal struggle 
and disturbance. Nor were the differences between the kings 
and their Dorian subjects the only troubles of the time. The sub- 
mitted Achaeans, of whom there were many, were displeased at 
their treatment, murmured and even sometimes revolted, and 
being reduced by force of arms were degraded to a lower position. 

Formation of the three classes into which the Lacedaemonians were divided 
throughout the whole of their subsequent history. 1. The Spartans, or free 
inhabitants of the capital, the sole possessors of political rights and privileges ; 
Dorians by extraction, with few and unimportant exceptions, owners of the 
bulk of the soil, on the rent of which they lived in comfort and independence ; 
2. The Perioeci, or free inhabitants of the country-towns and villages, citizens 
in a certain sense, but without franchise ; possessors of the poorer lands, and 
the only class engaged in trade, commerce, and handicrafts ; Achgeans in blood 
for the most part, but with a slight Doric infusion. 3. The Helots, or slave 
population, composed of captives taken in war {oKaTo'i), and of submitted 
rebels ; Achaean mainly in blood till the Messenian wars, after which they may 
be regarded as Achaeo-Dorians ; chiefly employed in cultivating the lands of 
their Spartan masters, to whom they paid a fixed rent of one-half the produce. 
This third class was insignificant at first, but increased in number as Sparta 
extended her territory, and, upon the conquest of Messenia, became the pre- 
ponderating element in the population. 

Condition of the Helots not without its advantages, but rendered unhappy 
by the cruel institution of the Crypteia, a legalised system of assassination to 
which the government from time to time actually had recourse. 

9. The double monarchy, which, according to the tradition, had 
existed from the time of the conquest, and which was peculiar 
to Sparta among all the Greek states, dated really, it is probable, 
from the time of struggle, being a device of those who sought to 
limit and curtail the royal authority. The two kings, like the two 
consuls at Rome, acted as checks upon each other ; and the regal 

Legislation power, thus divided against itself, naturally became 
°^ about^"^' weaker and weaker. It had sunk, evidently^ into a 

B.C. 850. shadow of its former self, when Lycurgus, a member 

of the royal family, but not in the direct line of succession, gave 

to Sparta that constitution which raised her in a little while to 

a proud and wonderful eminence. 

Difficulty of distinguishing how much of the Spartan constitution was 
original, and how much dated from Lycurgus. Tendency to exaggerate 
the extent of his innovations. Original constitution must have included the 
division into three tribes, Hylleei, Dymanes, and Pamphyles, which was 
common to all Dorians, the monarchy, some sort of senate or council, and 
some kind of assembly. Doubtful whether the thirty ObcB were instituted 
by Lycurgus or no, and therefore doubtful whether he determined the number 
of the senate. Chief object of his legislation to create and preserve a race of 



PER. II. PABT I.] SPARJA. 129 

vigorous and warlike men. Hence, the introduction of his system of disci- 
pline was of primary importance ; his constitutional changes were altogether 
secondary and by comparison trivial. 

The Lyeurgean Constitution may be briefly summed up as follows : — 1. It 
maintained the double monarchy, but reduced the power of the kings, who 
became little more than presidents of the senate, with a right of proxy voting, 
and a casting vote if the senate was equally divided. 2. It maintained or 
established the senate of thirty members (twenty-eight and the two kings), 
representing the thirty Oboe, but, from the time of Lycurgus, elected by the 
general assembly of the citizens from among the Spartans who were more 
than sixty years of age. 3. It probably enlarged the powers of the assembly 
(aVeXAa), which had henceforth not only the right of electing the senate, 
but that of accepting or rejecting all laws, of deciding on peace and war, on 
alliances, &c. 4. It set up for the first time certain officers called Ephors, 
whose business it was to -watch o-ver the Lycurgean constitution and punish 
those who infringed it. 

The LycTirgean Discipline comprised the following main points : — 1. The 
decision in every case by state officials of the question whether a child should 
be reared or no. 2. The separation of all male children at the age of seven 
from their homes, and their training and education from that time by State 
educators. The usual branches of Greek education, letters, music, and gym- 
nastics, were taught, but the literary part of the education was of least, and the 
gymnastic of far the greatest, account. The boy's time was chiefly passed in 
athletic exercises, then in hunting, and finally in drills, after which he was 
allowed to bear a part in military expeditions. He took his meals in public at 
the syssitia, his fare being both simple and scanty ; he slept with his fellows in 
the public dormitories ; at a certain age he was allowed no food, except such 
as he could take without discovery. Everything was done with the object 
of making him a perfectly efficient soldier. 3. The men had little more 
liberty than the boys. They too fed at the public messes (^crvaa-'nia) on the 
plainest fare, and slept in the public barracks, only visiting their homes occa- 
sionally and, as it were, by stealth. Their time was fully occupied by State 
duties, as drills, public hunting expeditions, superintendence and training of 
the boys, and actual warfare. They had no private life, and no time to 
employ in commerce, agriculture, or other profitable occupation. 4. The 
possession of gold and silver was forbidden, and no money allowed to circu- 
late but a heavy iron coinage. 5. Girls were trained no less carefully than 
boys, in athletic exercises nearly similar ; but separately, excepting on occa- 
sions, when their contests were witnessed by the males. 6. Marriage was 
superintended by the State. The citizen was forbidden to marry until he 
was of ripe age, and was then required to marry under a penalty. He chose 
his own wife ; but if the marriage proved unprolific, he was bound to allow 
his wife to obtain issue by means of another. Other violations of the sanctity 
of marriage ■ were also allowed under certain circumstances, as the bigamy 
both of men and women ; but, excepting under State sanction, incontinency 
was forbidden and was rare. 

Question of the division of the Lacedaemonian territory by Lycurgus. 
The division unknown to Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon, Isocrates, 
Plato, and Aristotle. Rests on the authority of Polybius and Plutarch. 
Intrinsically improbable. (Compare Grote, History of Greece, part. ii. chap, vi.) 

10. The adoption of the Lycurgean system had the almost 

immediate effect of raising Sparta to the first place 

° ^ ^ Rise of 

in Greece. Amyclse fell in the next generation Sparta to 

to Lycurgus j Pharis and Geronthrae submitted soon power. 
after. A generation later Helos was taken, and the whole 

K 



I30 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

valley of the Eurotas occupied. The Achseans submitted, or 
retired to Italy. Wars followed with Arcadia and Argos^ the 
latter of whom lost all her territory south of Cynuria. Quarrels 
began with Messenia, which led on to a great struggle. 

11. The conquest of Messenia by Sparta, which made her at 
once the dominant power of the Peloponnese, was the result of 

two great wars, each lasting about twenty years, 

Messenia, ^'^'^ separated from each other by the space of 

^•<^- about forty years. The wars seem to have been 

743-668. ■' '' 

purely aggressive on the part of Sparta, and to 
have been prompted, in part, by the mere lust of conquest, in 
part by dislike of the liberal policy which the Dorians of Mes- 
senia had adopted towards their Achaean subjects. Despite the 
heroism of the Messenians and the assistance lent them by 
Arcadia and Argos, Sparta gained her object, in consequence 
of her superior military organisation and training, joined to the 
advantage of her central position, which enabled her to strike 
suddenly with her full force any one of her three foes. 

First Messenian War, B.C. 743 to 724. Long defence of Ithorne. Corinth 
assists Sparta in the war, while Argos, Arcadia, and Sicyon assist Messenia. 
Strength and resources of Messenia gradually exhausted. Ithom^ evacuated 
and resistance discontinued in the twentieth year after the war commenced. 
Many of the inhabitants quit the country and fly to Arcadia and Argolis. 
Sparta reduces the remainder to the condition of Helots. 

Second Messenian War, B.C. 685 to 668. Standard of revolt raised by Aris- 
tomenes, who, assisted by Argos, Arcadia, Sicyon, and Pisatis, defeats the Spar- 
tans at the 'Boar's Tomb,' but is afterwards defeated and shut up in Eira. Pro- 
longed defence of that fortress. The' Spartans, encouraged by the Athenian 
poet Tyrtseus, at length successful. Eira taken. Aristomenes flies to Rhodes. 
The Messenians generally are once more reduced to the Helot condition ; 
but the inhabitants of a few towns are admitted to the position of Perioeci. 

12. Closely connected with the Messenian wars were certain 
changes in the government and internal condition of Sparta, the 

general tendency of which was towards popularising 

in the the constitution. The constant absence of the two 

constitution, j^^^gg ^^^^ Sparta during the Messenian struggle 

increased the power of the Ephors, who, when no king was 
present, assumed that to them belonged the exercise of the royal 
functions. The loss of citizens in the wars led to the admission 
of new blood into the state, and probably caused the distinction 
into two classes of citizens (ojuotot and vTTO[xeCovei), which is found 
to exist at a later date. The Ephors, elected annually by the 
entire body of the citizens, became the popular element in the 



PER. II. PART I.] SPARTA. 131 

government; and the gradual augmentation of their power was, 

in a certain sense, the triumph of the popular cause. At the same 

time it must be allowed that the constitutional changes made did 

not content the aspirations of the democratic party ; and that the 

colony sent out to Tarentum at once indicated, and relieved, the 

dissatisfaction of the lower grade of citizens. 

Are we to connect with the distinction of ofxoioi and vTvofxeloves the two 
iKKK-qa-iai at Sparta, the lesser (17 ^iKpa) and the greater (17 ^eydX?;) ? Is the 
former the assembly of the 61x0101 only, the latter that of the o^iomi and 
vTrofieiovfs together ? 

13. The conquest of Messenia was followed by some wars of 
less importance, which tended, however, to increase the power 
of Sparta, and to render her still more decidedly the Wars with 
leading state of Greece. Pisatis and Triphylia were ArcadTa 
reduced directly after the close of the second Mes- and Argos. 
senian war, and were handed over to the Eleans. of the 
Arcadia was then attacked, but made a vigorous Thyreatis. 
resistance ; and the sole fruit of a war which lasted three genera- 
tions was the submission of Tegea. Argos about the same time 
lost the Thyreatis (about b. c. 554) ; and Spartan influence was thus 
extended over, perhaps, two-thirds of the Peloponnese. 

14. Hitherto the efforts and even the views of Sparta had been 

confined to the narrow peninsula within which her own territory 

lay j but the course of events now led her to a fuller Recognition 

recognition of her own greatness, and, as a natural of Sparta 
° D 3 7 as the lead- 

consequence, to active exertions in a more extended ing power 

sphere. The embassy of Croesus in B.C. ^^^ was the ^ *^dUions 

first public acknowledgment which she received of beyond the 

her importance ; and the readiness with which she ^ oponnese. 

embraced the offer of alliance, and prepared an expedition to 

assist the Lydian monarch, indicates the satisfaction which she 

felt in the new prospects which were opening out on her. Thirty 

years later (b.c. ^25), she actually sent an expedition, conjointly 

with Corinth, to the coast of Asia, which failed, however, to effect 

its object, the deposition of Polycrates of Samos. Soon afterwards 

(B.C. 510), she assumed the right of interference in the internal 

affairs of the Greek states beyond the Peloponnese, and by her 

repeated invasions of Attica, and her efforts in favour of the 

Athenian oligarchs, sowed the seeds of that fear and dislike with 

which she was for nearly a century and a half regarded by the 

great democratic republic. 

K 2 



132 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

Spartan Kings : — The personal history of the Spartan kings becomes 
interesting, and the dates of their several accessions may be fixed with 
tolerable certainty, from the time of Cleomenes and his colleague Demaratus. 
Of the previous monarchs we know little more than the names. These are — 
1. Elder House of Agida. i. Eurysthenes ; 2. Agis (his son?); 3. Eches- 
tratus (his son) ; 4. Labotas (his son) ; 5. Doryssus (his son) ; 6. Agesilaiis 
(his son); 7. Archelaus (his son) ; 8. Teleclus (his son) ; 9. Alcamenes (his 
son) ; 10. Polydorus (his son) ; 11. Eurycrates (his son) ; 12. Anaxander (his 
son); 13. Eurycratidas (his son) ; 14. Leon (his son) ; and 15. Anaxandridas 
(his son). 2. Younger House of Eurypontidce. i. Procles ; 2. Solis (his son); 
3. Eurypon (his son?); 4. Prytanis (his son); 5. Eunomus (his son); 
6, Polydectes (his son) ; 7. Charilaiis (his son) ; 8. Nicander (his son) ; 
9. Theopompus (his son); 10. Zeuxidamus (his grandson); 11. Anaxidamus 
(his son); 12. Archidamus I (his son); 13. Agesicles (his son); and 14. 
Ariston (his son). These fifteen generations may probably have covered 
a space of nearly five centuries, from about B.C. 1000 to B.C. 520. 

History of Athens. 

Authorities. The history of Athens is best treated in the general works 
on Greek history enumerated above, p. 118. Besides these, however, many 
special works have been written on the History, Chronology, Constitution, and 
Finances of Athens. Among them the foUovdng are of importance : — 

CoRSiNi, Fasti Attici. Florence, 1744-56 ; 4 vols. 4to. The best work 
on the chronology. 

ScHoMANN, De Comitiis Atheniensium. Gryphisv., 1819 ; 8vo. 

BOECKH, A., Staatsaushaltung der Athener. Berlin, 1817. 
Translated into English by Sir G. C. Lewis, and published under the title. 
Public Economy of Athens. London, 1828; 2 vols. 8vo. An excellent work, 
quite exhaustive of its subject. 

Levesque, Sur la constitution de la Republique d'' At bene s, in the fourth volume 
of the Memoires de I 'Institut, pp. 1 1 3 et seqq. 

15. The traditional history of Athens commences with a Kingly 

period. Monarchs of the old heroic type are said to have governed 

History of ^^^ country from a time considerably anterior to the 

Athens: Trojan War down to the death of Codrus, b.c. 1300 

First or 

Kingly, to 1050. The most celebrated of these kings was 
period. Theseus, to whom is ascribed the avvoiKLaixos, whereby 
Athens became the capital of a centralised monarchy^ instead of 
one out of many nearly equal country towns. Another king, 
Menestheus, was said to have fought at Troy. Codrus, the last 
of the monarchs, fell, according to the tradition, in resisting a 
Dorian invasion, made from the recently conquered Peloponnese. 

Institutions of this Period. Among these must be placed, first of all, the 
division of the whole people into four tribes — Teleontes (or Geleontes), 
Hopletes, ^Egicoreis, and Argadeis — which was, perhaps, common to the 
Athenians with all other Ionic peoples, and which appears to imply the early 
existence in Greece of the idea of caste. 2. The subdivisions of the tribes — 
first, into ' Brotherhoods ' {c^paTpiai) and ' Clans ' {yevrf) ; and secondly, into 
' Thirdings ' (jpiTTves') and ' Naucraries ' — the former a division believed to 
rest, and probably actually resting, upon the basis of consanguinity ; the latter 



PER. II. PART I.] ATHENS. 133 

an artificial arrangement made for certain State purposes, as taxation and 
military service. 3. The recognition of three classes in the community, viz. 
Nobles (eiiTrarpt'Sat), Farmers (yeaiiopoi}, and Artisans Qdrjuiovpyoi'), the first 
of which alone possessed important political power, filling all offices of import- 
ance, and furnishing the senate or council (^011X77), which held its sittings on 
Mars' Hill (Areopagus). The ' Farmers ' and ' Artisans ' had, no doubt, the 
right of attending, and expressing assent or dissent, in the dyopd. 

16. The Kingly period was followed at Athens by the gradual 
development of an aristocracy. The Eupatrids had acquired 
power enough under the kings to abolish monarchy at 

the death of Codrus, and to substitute for it the life- ^°|e o^The 
archonship, which, though confined to the descend- 4-'''^^°"^ 
ants of Codrus, was not a royal dignity, but a mere 
chief magistracy. The Eupatrids elected from among the qualified 
persons j and the archon was, at least in theory, responsible. 
Thirteen such archons held office before any further change was 
made, their united reigns covering a space of about three centuries, 
B.C. 1050 to 753. 

In the earlier part of this period occurred the migration from Attica of the 
lonians, Minyans, Pylians, and other refugees, who during the preceding time 
of disturbance had flocked into the Attic peninsula and there found an asylum. 
Otherwise, the whole of the period is devoid of historical incident. 

17. On the death of Alcmseon, the last archon for life, the 
Eupatrids made a further change. Archons were to be elected 
for ten years only, so that responsibility could be Third period, 
enforced, ex-archons being liable to prosecution and ^ecenniaf 
punishment. The descendants of Codrus were at Archons. 
first preserved in their old dignity; but the fourth decennial 
archon, Hippomanes, being deposed for his cruelty, the right of 
the Medontidse was declared to be forfeited (b. c. 714), and the 
office was thrown open to all Eupatrids. 

1 8. Finally, after seven decennial archons had held office, the 
supreme power was put in commission (b. c. 684). In lieu of 
a single chief magistrate, a board of nine archons, ^ , .. , 
annually elected, was set up, the original kingly Rule of the 
functions being divided among them. The aris- Nine Archons. 
tocracy was now fully installed in power, office being confined to 
Eupatrids, and every office being open to all such persons, Eupa- 
trids alone having the suffrage, and the Agora itself, or general 
assembly of the people, having ceased to meet, or become purely 
formal and passive. 

1 9. The full triumph of the oligarchy did not very long precede 



134 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

the first stir of democratic life. Within sixty years of the time of 
complete aristocratical ascendancy, popular discontent began to 

Popular dis- manifest itself, and a demand for 'written laivs arose, 

Legislation o^en the earliest cry of an oppressed people, 
of Draco. Alarmed, but not intimidated, the nobles endeavoured 
to crush the rising democratic spirit by an unsparing severity j their 
answer to the demands made on them was the legislation of Draco 
(B.C. 624), which, by making death the penalty for almost all 
crimes, placed the very lives of the citizens at the disposal of the 
ruling order. The increased dissatisfaction which this legislation 

Insurrection Caused probably encouraged Cylon to make his rash 
°toSoWs ^ attempt (b. c. 612), which was easily put down by 

legislation, the oligarchs; who, however, contrived to lose 
ground by their victory, incurring, as they did in the course of it, 
the guilt of sacrilege, and at the same time exasperating the 
people, who had hoped much from Cylon's effort. Under these 
circumstances, after a vain attempt had been made to quiet 
matters by the purification of Epimenides (e.g. 595), and after the 
political discontent had taken the new and dangerous shape 
involved in the formation of local factions (Pediaei, Parali, and 
Diacrii), Solon, a Eupatrid, but of so poor a family that he had 
himself been engaged in trade, was by common consent intrusted 
with the task of framing a new constitution, b. c. 594. 

Chief points of Solon's Legislation : — 1. Main object, to substitute for 
the oppressive oligarchy a moderate government, which should admit all Athe- 
nian citizens to a share of power, but give a predominating influence to the 
higher orders. This was effected by {a) a division of the people for political 
purposes into four classes, according to the amount of their income ; viz. the 
Pentacosiomedimni, or men whose income was of the yearly value of 500 
medimni of corn ; the Hippeis (knights), whose income was 300 such medimni ; 
the Zeugitse, whose income was 150 ; and the Thetes, whose income fell short 
of the last-named amount ; of whom the last (the Thetes) had the suffrage 
only without eligibility to any office, while the highest office of all, the archon- 
ship, which was the only door of admission into the Council of the Areopagus, 
was confined to the Pentacosiomedimni. (^) The institution of a new council, 
which was in most respects to supersede the old Council of the Areopagus, to 
have the right of initiating legislation and to form a portion of the executive. 
This council was to consist of 400 members, 100 from each of the old tribes, 
and was to be elected annually by the free votes of all the citizens, (c) The 
revival of a real iKKk-qaia, or assembly of the whole people, which was to 
elect the archons and councillors, to judge (^evdvvetv) the former at the 
expiration of their year of office, and to accept or reject all the laws and 
decrees proposed by the council. (<^) The institution of trial by jury, or the 
formation of popular law-courts, not indeed for the trial of offences in the first 
instance, but for the hearing of appeals from other tribunals, (e) The reten- 
tion of the old Council of the Areopagus, partly as a court of law, the highest 
tribunal in the State (compare the judicial functions of the English House of 



PEK. II. PABT I.] ATHENS. 135 

Lords), partly as a superintending body (compare the Ephoralty) charged 
with seeing to the observance of the laws, and einpowered to prevent or punish 
any departure from them. 2. A secondary object of Solon's legislation was 
to remedy the existing evil of wide-spread poverty and distress. The rule of 
the oligarchy had impoverished the mass of the nation ; and by the operation 
of a harsh and stern law of debt, the lands of the poorer cultivators had 
become mortgaged, and numbers of the citizens had sunk into the condition 
of slaves. Solon's remedies against these evils were the following : — {a) His 
o-eto-dx^eta, or abolition of debts — not, however, of all debts, but either those 
of a certain class, or those of persons proved insolvent. {})) A debasement 
of the currency, intended to be a reduction of one-fourth, or 25 per cent.; 
but accidentally a reduction of 27 per cent, (c) The abolition of servitude 
for debt, and the restoration to freedom of all former Athenian citizens not 
sold out of Attica, {d) The encouragement of industry by a provision that 
every father should teach his son a handicraft. It is uncertain how far these 
remedies would have had a permanent success. The rapid advance in the 
material prosperity of Athens, which followed quite independently of them, 
prevented the trial from being made, and at the same time rendered it un- 
necessary to recur again to such questionable expedients as cancelling debts 
and debasing the coin. 

20. The legislation of Solon, wise as it seems to moderns, was 
far from satisfying his contemporaries. Like most moderate poli- 
ticians, he was accused by one party of having gone struggle of 
too far, by another of not having done enough. His parties ter- 
personal influence sufficed for a time to restrain the the tyranny 
discontented j but when this influence was with- of Pisistratus. 
drawn (about B.C. 570), violent contentions broke out. The local 
factions (see § 19) revived. A struggle commenced between a 
reactionary party under Lycurgus, a conservative party under the 
Alcmaeonid Megacles, and a party of progress under Pisistratus, 
which terminated in the triumph of the last-named leader, who 
artfully turned his success to his own personal advantage by 
assuming the position of Dictator, or (as the Greeks called it) 
Tyrant, b. c. 560. 

Dynasty of the Pisistratidee :■ — 1. Reign of Pisistratus. His first exalta- 
tion, B.C. 560. Flight of the Alcmaeonidae. Pisistratus in his turn driven into 
exile, about B.C. 554. Re-establishes himself by arrangement with Megacles, 
about B.C. 548. Offends Megacles, and is again forced to fly, about B.C. 547. 
Re-establishes himself by force of arms, about B.C. 537, and continues tyrant 
for the rest of his life. Reigns mildly, encourages the arts, and edits Homer. 
Dies, B.C. 527. Succeeded by his eldest son, Hippias. 2. Reign of Hippias, 
B.C. 527 to 510. Murder of Hipparchus, his brother, by Harmodius and Aris- 
togeiton, B. c. 514. Intrigues of the exiled Alcmseonidae, who bribe the Delphic 
oracle, and thereby induce the Spartans to dethrone Hippias. After the first 
attempt, under Anchimolius, had failed, Cleomenes, in B.C. 510, forces the 
Pisistratidse to withdraw from the city. 

1 1 . The expulsion of the tyrant was followed by fresh troubles. 
A contest for power arose between Isagoras, the Yx&%\x 
friend of Cleomenes, and Clisthenes, the head of the troubles. 



136 GRECIAN STATES. [book in. 

Alcmaeonid family, which terminated in favour of the latter. 
Constitution despite the armed interference of Sparta. Clis- 
of Clisthenes. thenes, however, had to purchase his victory by an 
alliance with the democratical party j and the natural result of his 
success was a further change in the constitution, which was 
modified in a democratic sense. 

Chief points of the Constitution of Clisthenes : — {a) Admission to 
citizenship of all free inhabitants of Attica, whether members of the old tribes 
or not. (^) Supersession of the old tribes for political purposes by the new 
tribes, ten in number (each embracing ten demes, or country towns, with 
their adjacent districts), now for the first time established by the legislator. 
(f ) Substitution of a council of five hundred, fifty from each of the ten tribes, 
for the Solonian council of four hundred, (d) Counteraction of the tendency 
to local factions by the inclusion within each tribe of demes remote from each 
other, {e) Fresh organisation of the law courts (Si/cacrrijpta) and extension 
of their functions. (/) Introduction of the Octracism. {g) Introduction of 
the principle of determining between the candidates for certain offices by lot. 
{h) Institution of the ten annual Strategi, who in a httle time superseded the 
archons as the chief executive officers. 

11. The establishment of democracy gave an impulse to the 

spirit of patriotism, which resulted almost immediately in some 

^.,. splendid military successes. Athens had for some 

successes of time been growing in warlike power. Under Solon 
'^ ^'^'^' she had taken Salamis from Megara, and played an 
important part in the first Sacred War (b. c. 600 to 59 1 ). About 
B.C. 518, or a little earlier, she had accepted the protectorate of 
the Plataeans. Now (b. c. 507) being attacked at one and the same 
time by Sparta, by Boeotia, and by the Chalcideans of Euboea, she 
completely triumphed over the coalition. The Spartan kings 
quarrelled, and the force under their command withdrew without 
risking a battle. The Boeotians and Chalcideans were signally 
defeated. Chalcis itself was conquered and occupied. A naval 
struggle with ^Egina, the ally of Boeotia, followed, during the con- 
tinuance of which the first hostilities took place between Athens and 
Persia. Proud of her recent victories, and confident in her strength, 
Athens complied with the request of Aristagoras and sent twenty 
ships to support the revolt which threatened to deprive the Great 
King of the whole seaboard of Asia Minor. Though the burning 
of Sardis was followed by the defeat of Ephesus, yet the Persian 
monarch deemed his honour involved in the further chastisement 
on her own soil of the audacious power which had presumed to 
invade his dominions. An attempt to conquer Greece would, no 
doubt, have been made even without provocation ; but the part 



PER. II. PART II.] ACH^A, &C. 137 

taken by Athens in the Ionic revolt precipitated the struggle. It 
was well that the contest came when it did. Had it been delayed 
until Athens had grown into a rival to Sparta, the result might 
have been different. Greece might then have succumbed j and 
European freedom and civilisation, trampled under foot by the 
hordes of Asia, might have been unable to recover itself. 



PART XL 

History of the other Grecian States. 

Sources. The data for the history of the other states are scanty. They 
consist chiefly of scattered notices in Herodotus, Thucydides, and the 
geographers. Light is occasionally thrown on the constitutional history of 
the states by Aristotle. Inscriptions also are, in many cases, of importance. 
Among the most valuable collections of these are : — 

Chishull, Inscriptiones Asiaticce. London, 1728 ; folio. 

BoECKH, Corpus Inscriptionum GrcBcarum. Berlin, 1828-43; 3 vols, folio. 
A magnificent work. 

Rose, Inscriptiones GrcBcce •vetustissimce. Cambridge, 1825 ; 8vo. 

The history of the smaller states will be most conveniently 
given under the five heads of {a) the Peloponnesian States • [h] the 
States of Central Greece j {c) those of Northern Greece ; [d) those 
situated in the islands ; and {e) those which either were, or were 
regarded as, colonies. 

A. Smaller Peloponnesian States. 

i. Acbaa. The traditions said that when the Dorians conquered Sparta, 
the Spartan king Tisamenus, son of Orestes, led the Achgeans northwards, 
and, expelling the lonians from the tract which lay along the Corinthian Gulf, 
set up an Achsean kingdom in those parts, which lasted for several generations. 
Ogygus, however, the latest of these monarchs, having left behind him sons 
of a tyrannical temper, the Acheeans destroyed the monarchy, and set up a 
federal republic. Twelve cities composed the league, which were originally 
Pellene, ^Egeira (or Hyparesia), iEgae, Bura, Helice, ^fegium, Rhypes, Patrae, 
Pharse, Olenus, Dyme, and Tritsea, all situated on or near the coast except 
the two last, which were in the interior. The common place of meeting for 
the league was Helic^, where an annual festival was held, and common sacri- 
fices were offered to Heliconian Neptune. The constitution of the several 
cities is said to have been democratic. The league was, no doubt, political 
as well as religious ; but no details are known of it. According to Polybius 
it was admired for its fairness and equality, and was taken as a model by the 
cities of Magna Graecia in the early part of the fifth century. We may gather 
from Thucydides that it was of the loose type so common in Greece. The 
Achaeans seem to have manifested in the early times a disposition to stay at 
home and to keep aloof from the quarrels of their neighbours. Hence the 
history of the country scarcely begins till the time of Antigonus, from which 
period the league formed a nucleus round which independent Greece raUied 
itself. 



138 GRECIAN STATES [book m, 

ii. Arcadia. The Arcadians were regarded as aboriginal inhabitants of their 
country. They called themselves Trpoa-eXrjvoi. The Dorian conquests in the 
Peloponnese left them untouched ; and they retained to a late date, in their 
remote valleys and cold high mountain pastures, very primitive habits. The 
tradition makes the entire country form, in the old times, a single monarchy, 
which continues till B.C. 668 ; but it may be doubted whether there had 
really ever existed in Arcadia anything more than an Amphictyonic union 
prior to Epaminondas. The whole country is physically broken up into sepa- 
rate valleys and basins, whose inhabitants would naturally form separate and 
distinct communities, while retaining a certain sense of ethnic relationship. 
The most important of these communities were Mantinea and Tegea, neigh- 
bouring towns, between which there were frequent wars. Next to these 
may be placed Orchomenus, Pheneus, and Stymphalus towards the north-east; 
Cleitor and Hersea towards the west ; and Phigaleia, on the north-western 
border, near Messenia. The Arcadians, however, loved villages rather than 
towns ; and the numerous population was chiefly located in small hamlets 
scattered about the mountains. Arcadia was subject to constant aggressions 
at the hands of Sparta, which she sought to revenge upon fitting occasions. 
These aggressions began in the times previous to Lycurgus (see above, p. 127), 
and continued afterwards almost constantly. In retaliation, the Arcadians 
assisted Messenia throughout both the Messenian wars. Tegea, as the nearest 
state to Sparta, suffered most at her hands ; and after a long struggle, it would 
seem that Arcadia generally (about B.C. 560) acknowledged the Lacedaemonian 
hegemony, placing her full military strength at the disposal of Sparta in her 
wars, but retaining her internal independence. Mantinea even, upon oc- 
casions, thwarted the policy of Sparta. 

iii. Corinth. Corinth, a rich and famous city even in the times anterior to 
the Doric conquests, was occupied by Dorian settlers from Argos soon after 
the reduction of that state. A monarchy was established under kings who 
claimed descent from Hercules, twelve such rulers holding the throne during 
the space of 327 years. At the end of this time monarchy was exchanged 
for oligarchy, power remaining (as at Athens) in the hands of a branch of the 
royal family, the Bacchiadas, who intermarried only among themselves, and 
elected each year from their own body a Prytanis, or chief magistrate. This 
state of things continued for ninety years, when a revolution was effected by 
Cypselus, who, having ingratiated himself with the people, rose up against the 
oligarchs, expelled them, and made himself tyrant. Cypselus reigned from 
B.C. 657 to 627, when he was succeeded by his son, Periander, who reigned 
from B.C. 627 to 587. A third monarch of the dynasty, Psammetichus, the 
nephew or grandson of Periander, mounted the throne, but was expelled, after 
a reign of three years, by the people, perhaps assisted by Sparta, B.C. 584. 
The time of the Cypselids was one of great material wealth and prosperity ; 
literature and the arts flourished ; commerce was encouraged ; colonies were sent 
out ; and the hegemony of the mother country over her colonies successfully 
asserted. (The chief Corinthian settlements were Corcyra, Ambracia, Leucas, 
Anactorium, Epidamnus, Apollonia, Syracuse, and Potidsea. Of these, Am- 
bracia, Leucas, Anactorium, Epidamnus, Apollonia, and Potidsea were content 
to be subject. Corcyra generally asserted independence, but was forced to 
submit to the Cypselids. Syracuse must have been from the first practically 
independent.) After the downfall of the tyrants, who are said to have ruled 
harshly, a repubhc was established on a tolerably wide basis. Power was 
placed in the hands of the wealthy class ; and even commerce and trade were 
no bars to the holding of office. Corinth became one of the richest of the Greek 
states ; but, as she increased in wealth, she sank in political importance. 
Regard for her material interests induced her to accept the protection of 
Sparta, and from about B.C. 550 she became merely the second power in the 
Spartan league, a position which she occupied with slight interruptions till 
B.C. 394. 



PER. II. PAKT 11.] MEGARIS, <kc. 139 

iv. Elis. The settlement of the ^toIo-Dorians under Oxylus (see p. 123) 
had been made in the more northern portion of the country, between the 
Larisus and the Ladon or Selleis. The region south of this as far as the 
Neda remained in the possession of the old inhabitants, and was divided into 
two districts, Pisatis, or the tract between the' Ladon and the Alpheus, of 
which Pisa was the capital, and Triphylia, the tract between the Alpheus and 
the Neda, of which the chief city was Lepreum. The Eleans, however, 
claimed a hegemony over the whole country; and this claim gave rise to 
frequent wars, in which the Eleans had the advantage, though they never 
succeeded in completely absorbing even Pisatis. The chief importance of 
Elis was derived from the celebration within her territory of the Olympic 
Games, a festival originally Pisan, of which the direction was assumed by the 
Eleans, but constantly disputed by the Pisatans, Sparta in the early times 
supported the Elean claims ; but in and after the Peloponnesian struggle it 
became her policy to uphold the independence of Lepreum. The Eleans 
dwelt chiefly in villages till after the close of the great Persian War, when the 
city of Elis was first founded, B.C. 477. 

v. Sicyon. Sicyon was believed to have been one of the oldest cities in 
Greece, and to have had kings of its own at a very remote period. Homer, 
however, represents it as forming, at the time of the Trojan War, part of the 
dominions of Agamemnon. Nothing can be said to be really known of Sicyon 
until the time of the Doric immigration into the Peloponnese, when it was oc- 
cupied by a body of Dorians from Argos, at whose head was Phalces, son of 
Temenus. A Heracleid monarchy was established in the line of this prince's 
descendants, which was superseded after some centuries by an oligarchy. 
Power during this period was wholly confined to the Dorians ; the native non- 
Doric element in the population, which was numerous, being destitute of poli- 
tical privilege. But towards the beginning of the seventh century B.C. a 
change occurred. Orthagoras, a non-Dorian, said to have been by profession 
a cook, subverted the oligarchy, established himself upon the throne, and 
quietly transferred the predominance in the state from the Dorian to the 
non-Dorian population. He left his throne to his posterity, who ruled for 
above a hundred years. Clisthenes, the last monarch of the line, adding 
insult to injury, changed the names of the Dorian tribes in Sicyon from 
Hyllaei, Dymanes, and Pamphyli to Hyatse, Oneatas, and Chaereatse, or ' Pig- 
folk,' 'Ass-folk,' and 'Swine-folk.' He reigned from about B.C. 595 to 560. 
About sixty years after his death, the Dorians in Sicyon seem to have re- 
covered their preponderance, and the state became one of the most submissive 
members of the Lacedaemonian confederacy. 

B. Smaller States of Central Greece. 

i. Megaris. Megaris was occupied by Dorians from Corinth, shortly after 
the great immigration into the Peloponnese. At first the colony seems to 
have been subject to the mother country; but this subjection was soon 
thrown off, and we find Corinth fomenting quarrels among the various Mega- 
rian towns — Megara, Hersea, Peirsea, Tripodiscus, and Cynosura — in the 
hope of recovering her influence. About B.C. 726 the Corinthians seem to 
have made an attempt at conquest, which was repulsed by Orsippus, the 
Olympian runner. Nearly at the same time commenced the series of Mega- 
rian colonies, which form so remarkable a feature in the history of this state. 
The first of these was Megara Hyblaea, near Syracuse, founded (according to 
Thucydides) in B.C. 728, from which was sent out a sub-colony to Selinus; 
then followed Chalcedon, in B.C. 674 ; Byzantium, in B.C. 657 ; Selymbria, in 
B.C. 662 ; Heraclea Pontica, in B.C. 559; and Chersonesus, near the modern 
Sebastopol, not'long afterwards. The naval power of Megara must have been 
considerable; and it is not surprising to find that about this time (b.c. 600) 



140 GRECIAN STATES. [book m. 

she disputed with Athens the possession of Salamis. Her despot, Theagenes, 
was an enterprising and energetic monarch. Rising to power as the repre- 
sentative of the popular cause (about B.C. 630), he supported his son-in-law, 
Cylon, in his attempt to occupy a similar position at Athens. (See p. 134.) 
He adorned Megara with splendid buildings. He probably seized Salamis, 
and gained the victories which induced the Athenians for a time to put up 
with their loss. On his deposition by the oligarchs (about B.C. 600), the war 
was renewed — Nisaea was taken by Pisistratus, and Salamis recovered by 
Cylon. The oligarchs ruled without bloodshed, but still oppressively ; so that 
shortly afterwards there was a second democratic revolution. Debts were 
now abolished, and even the return of the interest paid on them exacted 
{jraKivTOKia). The rich were forced to entertain the poor in their houses. 
Temples and pilgrims are said to have been plundered. Vast numbers of the 
nobles were banished. At length the exiles were so numerous that they 
formed an army, invaded the country, and, reinstating themselves by force, 
established a somewhat narrow oligarchy, which ruled at least till B.C. 460. 

ii. Bceotia. When the Boeotians, expelled from Arne by the Thessalians, 
settled in the country to which they thenceforth gave name, expelling from it 
in their turn the Gadmseans, Minyae, &c., they seem to have divided them- 
selves into as many states as there were cities. What the form of government 
in the several states was at first is uncertain ; we can only say that there is no 
trace of monarchy, and that as soon as we obtain a glimpse of the internal 
affairs of any of them, they are oligarchical republics. The number of the 
states seems to have been originally fourteen, but by the time of the Pelo- 
ponnesian War it had dwindled to ten, partly by a process of absorption, 
partly by separation. Oropus, Eleutherae, and Plataea had been lost to Athens ; 
Chaeroneia had been incorporated with Orchomenus ; the remaining ten states 
were Thebes, Orchomenus, Thespiae, Lebadeia, Goroneia, Gopae, Haliartus, 
Tanagra, Anthedon, and perhaps Ghalia. Between these states there had 
existed, probably from the first, an Amphictyony, or religious union, which had 
the temple of Itonian Athene near Goroneia for its centre ; and there took 
place once a year the celebration of the Pamboeotia, or general festival of the 
Boeotians. By degrees, out of this religious association there grew up a federal 
union ; the states recognised themselves as constituting a single political unit, 
and arranged among themselves a real federal government. The supreme 
authority was placed in the hands of a council (/SouXtj), which had a curious 
fourfold division ; while the executive functions were exercised by eleven 
Boeotarchs (two from Thebes, one from each of the other cities), who were ' 
at once the generals of the league and its presiding magistrates. Though the 
place of meeting for the council seems to have been Goroneia, yet Thebes by 
her superior size and power obtained an undue predominance in the confede- 
ration, and used it in such a way as to excite the jealousy and disaffection of 
almost all the other cities. As early as B.C. 510, Plataea was driven to detach 
herself from the confederation, and to put herself under the protection of 
Athens. In later times Thespiee made more than one attempt to follow the 
Platsean example, B.C. 423 and 414. The readiness of Athens to receive and 
protect revolted members of the league was among the causes of that hostility 
which Boeotia was always ready to display towards her; and the general 
tendency of members of the league to revolt was among the chief causes 
of that political weakness which Boeotia exhibits, as compared with Athens 
and Sparta. 

iii. Phocis. There can be no doubt that Phocis was, like Boeotia, a confede- 
ration ; but from the comparative insignificance of the state no details of the 
constitution have come down to us. The place of meeting for the deputies 
seems to have been an isolated building {to ^(hkikov) on the route from Daulis 
to Delphi. No Phocian city had any such preponderance as belonged to 
Thebes among the cities of Boeotia, and hence the league appears to have 
been free from those perpetual jealousies and heartburnings which we remark 



PER. 11. PART II.] THESSALF, d-c. 141 

in the neighbouring country. Still certain secessions from the confederacy 
appear to have taken place, as that of Delphi, and, again, that of Cirrha, which 
was a separate state about B.C. 600. A constant enmity existed between 
Phocis and Thessaly, consequent upon the attempts made by the Thessalians 
from time to time to conquer the country. These attempts were sucessfully 
resisted ; but they were so far injurious to the independence of Phocis, that 
they produced a tendency to lean on Boeotia and to look to her for aid. 
Still, the military history of Phocis down to the close of the Persian War is 
creditable to the nation, which frequently repulsed the invasions of the Thes- 
salians, and which offered a brave resistance to the enormous host of Xerxes. 

iv. Locris. There were three countries of this name ; and though a 
certain ethnic connection between them may be assumed from the common 
appellation, yet politically the three countries appear to have been entirely 
separate and distinct. The Locri Ozolas (the 'stinking Locri') possessed the 
largest and most important tract, that lying between Parnassus and the 
Corinthian Gulf, bounded on the west by ^tolia. They probably formed 
a confederacy under the presidency of Amphissa. The Locri Epicnemidii, 
or Locrians of Mount Cnemis, and the Locri Opuntii, or those of Opus, were 
separated from their western brethren by the whole breadth of the territory 
of Phocis. They were also separated from each other, but only by a narrow 
strip or tongue of Phocian territory, which ran down to the Euripus at the 
town of Daphnus. Of the internal organisation of the Epicnemidii we know 
nothing. The Opuntians were probably a confederacy under the hegemony of 
Opus. 

V. jEtolia. ^tolia, the country of Diomed, though famous in the early 
times, fell back during the migratory period almost into a savage condition, 
probably through the influx into it of an Illyrian population which became 
only partially Hellenised. The nation was divided into numerous tribes, 
among which the most important were the Apodoti, the Ophioneis, the 
Eurytanes, and the Agraeans. There were scarcely any cities, village life 
being preferred universally. No traces appear of a confederation of the tribes 
until the time of Alexander, though in times of danger they could unite for 
purposes of defence against the common enemy. The Agrseans, so late as 
the Peloponnesian War, were under the government of a king : the political 
condition of the other tribes is unknown. It was not till the wars which 
arose among Alexander's successors that the -Sltolians formed a real political 
union, and became an important power in Greece. 

vi. Acarnania. The Acarnanians were among the more backward of the 
Greek nations in the historical times, but they were considerably more 
advanced than the iEtolians. They possessed a number of cities, among 
which the most important were Stratus, Amphilochian Argos, and CEniadae. 
From a very remote date they had formed themselves into a federation, which 
not only held the usual assemblies for federal purposes (probably at Stratus), 
but had also a common Court of Justice (^SiKaa-rrjpiov) for the decision of 
causes, at Olpee. There was great jealousy between the native Acarnanians 
and the colonies planted by the Corinthians on or near their coasts, Ambracia, 
Leucas, Anactorium, Sollium, and Astacus, which in the early times certainly 
did not belong to the league. The league itself was of the lax character 
usual in Greece, and allowed of the several cities forming their own alliances 
and even taking opposite sides in a war. 



C. S^afes of Northern Greece. 

i. Thessaly. The Thesprotian conquerors of Thessaly established a 
condition of things in that country not very unlike that which the Dorians 
introduced into Laconia. The conquerors themselves formed a noble class 
which claimed the ownership of most of the territory and confined to itself 



142 GRECIAN STATES. [book m. 

the possession of political power. The conquered were reduced to two very 
different positions: some retained their personal freedom and the right to 
their lands, but were made subject to tribute ; others (the Penestce) were 
reduced to the condition of serfs, cultivating the lands of their masters, but 
were protected in their holdings, could not be sold out of the country, and 
both might and did often acquire c-onsiderable property. The chief dif- 
ferences between the two countries were (i) that in Thessaly the inter- 
mediate class, Achseans, Magnetes, Perrhsebi, &c., instead of being scattered 
over the country and intermixed with the nobles ^and serfs, were the sole 
occupants of certain districts, retained their old ethnic name, their Amphic- 
tyonic vote, and their governmental organisation ; and (2) that the conquerors, 
instead of concentrating themselves in one city, took possession of several, 
establishing in each a distinct and separate government. The governments 
seem to have been originally monarchies, which merged in aristocracies, 
wherein one family held a quasi-royal position. The Aleuadae at Larissa 
and Pharsalus (?) and the Scopadae at Cranon correspond closely to the 
Medontidse at Athens (see page 133). A federal tie of the weakest character 
united the several states of Thessaly in ordinary times ; but upon occasions 
this extreme laxity was replaced by a most stringent centralisation. A 
Tagus (Commander-in-Chief) of all Thessaly was appointed, who exercised 
powers little short of despotic over the whole country. Such, apparently, was 
the power wielded (about B.C. 510) by Cineas, and such beyond all question was 
the dominion of Jason of Pherse, and his three brothers, Polydorus, Polyphron, 
and Alexander, B.C. 380 to 356. In the remoter times Thessaly was aggres- 
sive and menaced the independence of the states of Central Greece ; but from 
the dawn of exact history to the time of Jason her general policy was peaceful, 
and, except as an occasional ally of Athens, she is not found to have taken 
any part in the internal quarrels of the Greeks. Her aristocracies were 
selfish, luxurious, and devoid of patriotic feeling : content with their position 
at home, they did not desire the glory of foreign conquest. Thus Thessaly 
plays a part in the history of Greece very disproportioned to her power and 
resources, not rising into any importance till very shortly before the Mace- 
donian period. 

ii. Epirus. Anterior to the Persian wars, and indeed until the time of Philip 
of Macedon, Epirus was a mere geographical expression, designating no ethnic 
nor political unity. The tract so called was parcelled out among a number of 
states, some of which were Greek, others barbarian. Of these the chief 
were: (i) the semi-barbarous kingdom of the Molossians, ruled over by a 
family which claimed descent from Achilles — a constitutional monarchy, where 
the king and people ahke swore to observe the laws ; (2) the kingdom of the 
Orestae, barbarian ; (3) the kingdom of the Parausei, likewise barbarian ; (4) the 
republic of the Chaonians, barbarian, administered by two annual magistrates 
chosen out of a single ruling family ; (5) the republic of the Thesprotians, 
barbarian ; and (6) the Ambracian republic, Greek, a colony and dependency 
of Corinth. By alliance with Philip of Macedon, the Molossian kings were 
enabled to bring the Epirotic states under their dominion, about B. c. 350. 
After their fall, b. c. 239, Epirus became a federal republic. 



D. Greek Insular States. 

i. Corcyra. Corcyra, the most western of the Greek islands, was colonised 
from Corinth about B.C. 730. From the fertility of the island, and the 
advantages of its situation, the settlement soon became important : a jealousy 
sprang up between it and the mother country, which led to hostilities as 
early as B. c. 670. During the rule of the Cypselid princes at Corinth, 
Corcyra was forced to submit to them ; but soon after their fall independence 
was recovered. From this time till the commencement of the Peloponnesian 



PEE. II. PART II.] ISLANDS. 143 

War, the commerce and naval power of Corcyra went on increasing ; so early 
as the time of the invasion of Xerxes (B.C. 480) their navy was the second in 
Greece, and just before the Peloponnesian War it amounted to 120 triremes. 
The government was a republic, which fluctuated between aristocracy and 
democracy ; party spirit ran high ; and both sides were guilty of grievous 
excesses. On the connection of Corcyra with Athens, see below, p. 176. 

ii. Cephallenia. This island, though considerably larger than Corcyra, and 
exceedingly fertile, was politically insignificant. It contained four cities, each 
of which was a distinct state. Pale, Cranii, Same, and Pronus or Pronesus. 
Probably the four were united in a sort of loose confederation. Pale seems 
to have been the most important of the cities. 

iii. Zacynthus, which was originally peopled by Achaeans from the Pelopon- 
nese, formed an independent state till the time of the Athenian confederacy. 
It had a single city, of the same name with the island itself, and is chiefly noted 
in the early ages as furnishing an asylum to fugitives from Sparta. 

iv. ^gina is said to have been occupied by Dorian colonists from Epidaurus 
shortly after the invasion of the Peloponnese. It was at first completely 
dependent on the mother country ; but, growing in naval power, it in a little 
time shook off" the yoke, and became one of the most flourishing of the 
Grecian communities. The -ffilginetans early provoked the jealousy of Samos, 
and a war followed between the two powers, which had no very important 
consequences. About B.C. 500, ^gina found a more dangerous rival in her 
near neighbour, Athens, whose growing greatness she endeavoured to check, 
in combination with Boeotia. A naval war, which lasted about twenty years, 
was terminated, B.C. 481, by the common danger which threatened all Greece 
from the armament collected by Xerxes, ^gina played an important part in 
the Persian struggle ; but still it was one of the effects of the war to exalt her 
rival, Athens, to a very decided pre-eminence above all the other naval powers 
of Greece. Not content, however, with mere preponderance, Athens, on 
breaking with Sparta, B.C. 461, proceeded to crush j^gina, which resisted for 
four years, but in B.C. 457 became an Athenian dependency. 

K. O.MvL.i.'ERyjEgineticorum/iber. Berlin, 18 17; 8vo. This work contains, 
besides the political history, an account of iEginetan commerce and art. 

CoC'K.'EViE.U., Temples of ^gina and BasscR. London, i860 ; foho. Contains 
a full account of the discoveries made in the island by the author and others 
in 181 1 and 18 12. The sculptures obtained by the exploring party are in the 
Glyptothek at Munich. 

V. Euboea. This large island contained a number of separate and independent 
states, whereof the two most important were Eretria and Chalcis. These 
cities rose to eminence at an early period, and contended together in a great 
war, wherein most of the Greeks of Europe, and even some from Asia, took 
part. The balance of advantage seems to have rested with Chalcis, which in 
the later times always appears as the chief city of the island. Chalcis sent 
out numerous and important colonies, as Cuma and Rhegium in Italy ; Naxos, 
Leontini, Catana, and Zancle in Sicily ; Olynthus, Torone, and many other 
places on the coast of Thrace. Its constitution was oligarchical, the chief 
power being lodged in the hands of the * Horse-keepers ' (tTrTrojSoVat), or 
Knights. About B.C. 500, Chalcis was induced to join the Spartans and 
Boeotians in an attempt to crush Athens, which failed, and cost Chalcis its 
independence. The lands of the Hippobotae were confiscated, and an Athe- 
nian colony established in the place. Chalcis, together with the rest of 
Eubcea, revolted from Athens in B.C. 445, but was again reduced by Pericles. 
In the Peloponnesian War, B.C. 411, better success attended a second effort. 

vi. Ibe Cyclades. These islands are said to have been originally peopled by 
Carians from Asia Minor; but about the time of the great migrations (b.c. 
1200 to 1000) they were occupied by the Greeks, the more northern by Ionian, 
the more southern by Dorian adventurers. After a while an Ionian Amphictyony 



144 GRECIAN STATES. Ibook iii. 

grew up in the northern group, having the islet of Delos for its centre, and 
the temple of Apollo there for its place of meeting; whence the position 
occupied by Delos on the formation of the Athenian confederacy. The 
largest and, politically speaking, most important of the Cyclades were Andros 
and Naxos; the former of which founded the colonies of Acanthus, Sane, 
Argilus, and Stageirus in Thrace, while the latter repulsed a Persian attack 
in B.C. 501, and contended against the whole force of Athens in B.C. 466. 
Paros, famous for its marble, may be placed next to Andros and Naxos. It 
was the mother city of Thasos, and of Pharos in Illyria. Little is known of 
the constitutional history of any of the Cyclades. Naxos, however, seems to 
have gone through the usual course of Greek revolutionary change, being 
governed by an oligarchy until the time of Lygdamis (b.c. 540 to 530), who, 
professing to espouse the popular cause, made himself king. His tyranny did 
not last long, and an oligarchy was once more established, which in its turn 
gave way to a democracy before B.C. 501. 

vii. Lemnos. This island, which had a Thracian population in the earliest 
times and then a Pelasgic one, was iirst Hellenised after its conquest, about B.C. 
500, by the great Miltiades. It was from this time regarded as an Athenian 
possession, and seems to have received a strong body of colonists from Athens. 
Lemnos contained two towns, Hephsestia and Myrina, which formed separate 
states at the time of the Athenian conquest. Hephaestia was at that time 
under a king. 

viii. Thasos, which was peculiarly rich in minerals, was eariy colonised by 
the Phoenicians, who worked the mines very successfully. lonians from Paros 
Hellenised it about B.C. 720 to 700, and soon raised it into a powerful state. 
Settlements were made by the Thasians upon the mainland opposite their 
northern shores, whereof the most important were Scapte-Hyle and Datum. 
The gold-mines in this quarter were largely worked, and in B.C. 492 the 
Thasians had an annual revenue of from 200 to 300 talents (48,000/. to 
72,000/.). In B.C. 494, Histiasus of Miletus attempted to reduce the island, 
but failed; it was, however, in the following year forced to submit to the 
Persians. On the defeat of Xerxes, Thasos became a member of the Athe- 
nian confederacy, but revolting, B. c. 465, was attacked and forced to submit, 
B.C. 463. In the Peloponnesian War another revolt (b.c. 411) was again fol- 
lowed by submission, B.C. 408, and Thasos thenceforth continued, except for 
short intervals, subject to Athens. 

ix. Crete. The population of Crete in the early times was of a very mixed 
character. Homer enumerates among its inhabitants Acheeans, Eteocretes, 
Cydonians, Dorians, and Pelasgi. Of these the Eteocretes and Cydonians 
were even further removed than the Pelasgi from the Hellenic type. In the 
early days the Cretans were famous pirates, whence probably the traditions of 
Minos and his naval power. Whether the Dorian population was really settled 
in the island from a remote antiquity, or reached Crete from the Peloponnese 
after the Dorian conquest of the Achaean kingdoms, is a disputed point ; but 
the latter view is, on the whole, the more probable. In the historical times 
the Dorian element had a decided preponderance over all the rest, and insti- 
tutions prevailed in all the chief cities, which had a strong resemblance to 
those of Sparta. The Spartan division of the freemen into citizens and periaci 
existed also in Crete ; and, though the latter country had no Helots, their 
place was supplied by slaves, public and private, who cultivated the lands for 
their masters. Among these last a system of syssitia, closely resembling the 
Spartan, was established ; and a military training similar in character, though 
less severe. The island was parcelled out among a number of separate states, 
often at war with one another, but wise enough to unite generally against 
a common enemy. Of these states the most powerful were Gnossus and 
Gortyna, each of which aspired to exercise a hegemony over the whole island. 
Next in importance was Cydonia, and in later times Lyctus, or Lyttus. 
Originally the cities were ruled by hereditary kings ; but ere long their place 



PER. II. PAET II.] ISLANDS. 145 

was taken by elected Gosmi, ten in each community, who held office for a 
certain period, probably a year, and were chosen from certain families. Side 
by side with this executive board, there existed in each community a senate 
(yepovala), composed of all who had served the office of Cosmos with credit, 
and constituting really the chief power in the state. There was, further, an 
assembly (eKKXrja-la) comprising all the citizens, w^hich accepted or rejected the 
measures submitted to it, but had no initiative, and no power of debate or 
amendment. Crete took no part in the general affairs of Greece till after the 
time of Alexander. It maintained a policy of abstinence during both the 
Persian and Peloponnesian Wars. The military character of the Cretans was, 
however, maintained, both by the frequent quarrels of the states one with 
another, and by the common practice of taking service as mercenaries. 

The institutions and history of Crete have been made the subject of 
elaborate comment by several very laborious writers. The best works are 
those of 

Meursius, Creta, Cyprus, Rhodus. Amsterdam, 1675; 4to, A most valu- 
able collection of all that ancient writers have said on the subject. 

Hock, Kreta. Gottingen, 1829; 3 vols., 8vo. Particularly ample in all 
that concerns the early, or mythological, history. 

Neumann, K. F., Rerum Cretkarum specimen, Gottingen, 1820. 

X. Cyprus. This island seems to have been originally occupied by the 
Kittim, a Japhetic race, who left their name in the old capital, Citium 
(Kmov). Soon after the first development of Phoenician power, however, it 
passed into the possession of that people, who long continued the predominant 
race in the island. When Hellenic colonists first began to flow into it is 
doubtful; but there is evidence that by the time of Sargon (b.c. 720 to 700) 
a large portion of the island was Greek, and under Esarhaddon all the cities, 
except Paphos, Tamisus, and Aphrodisias, appear to have been ruled by 
Greek kings. Cyprus seems scarcely ever for any length of time to have been 
independent. It was held by the Phoenicians from about B.C. iioo to 725, 
by the Assyrians from about B.C. 700 to 650, by the Egyptians from about 
B.C. 550 to 525, and by the Persians from B.C. 525 to 333. The most im- 
portant of the cities, which, by whomsoever founded, eventually became 
Greek, were Salamis and Ammochosta (now Famagusta) on the eastern 
coast ; Citium, Curium, and Paphos on the southern ; Soli and Lapethus on the 
northern ; and Limenia, Tamasus, and Idalium in the interior. Amathus con- 
tinued always Phoenician. The most flourishing of the Greek states was 
Salamis ; and the later history of the island is closely connected with that of 
the Salaminian kings. Among these were : — 1. Evelthon, contemporary with 
Arcesilaus III of Cyrene, about B.C. 530 ; 2. Gorgus ; and 3. Onesilus, con- 
temporary with Darius Hystaspis, B.C. 520 to 500. The latter joined in the 
Ionian revolt, but was defeated and slain. 4. Evagoras I, contemporary with 
Artaxerxes Longimanus, B.C. 449. 5. Evagoras II, contemporary with Arta- 
xerxes Mnemon, B.C. 391 to 370. This prince rebelled, and, assisted by the 
Athenians and Egyptians, carried on a long war against the Persians, but, after 
the Peace of Antalcidas, was forced to submit, B.C. 380, retaining, however, 
his sovereignty. 6. Protagoras, brother of Evagoras II, contemporary with 
Artaxerxes Ochus, B.C. 350. He banished Evagoras, son of Evagoras II, and 
joined the great revolt which followed Ochus' first and unsuccessful expedition 
against Egypt. This revolt was put down before B.C. 346, by the aid of 
mercenaries commanded by Phocion ; and thenceforth Cyprus continued 
faithful to Persia, till Alexander's victory at Issus, when the nine kings of the 
island voluntarily transferred their allegiance to Macedon, B.C. 333. 

The best and fullest account of the history of Cyprus will be found in the 
work of Meursius, mentioned above. On the geography of the island the 
student may consult with profit — 

Yj^g^-l, Kypros. Berlin, 184 1 ; 8vo. And 

Ross, Reisen nach Kos, Halicarnassus, Rhodos, und der Inseln Cypern. Halle, 1852. 



146 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 



E. Greek Colonies. 

The chief works treating the subject generally are the following : — 

RaoUL-RocheTTE, Histoire critique de V etahlissement des Colonies Grecques. 
Paris, 1815; 4 vols., 8vo. A most erudite and comprehensive work, but 
deficient in critique. 

Hegewisch, D. H., Geographische und historische Nachrichten, die Colonien 
der Griechen betreffend. Altona, 1848; 8vo. Clear and concise. 

St. Croix, De Vetat et du sort des Colonies des anciens peuples. Philadelphia , 
1779. 

Bougainville, J. P., Quels etoient les droits des Metropoles Grecques sur les 
colonies • les devoirs des colonies en'vers les metropoles ; et les engagements recipro- 
ques des unes et des autres'? Paris, 1745. 

Hermann, K. F., Lehrbuch, Sfc. (see p. 124), chap. iv. pp. 73-90. The 
best synopsis of the subject. 

I. The number of the Greek colonies, and their wide diffusion, 

are very remarkable. From the extreme recess of the Sea of Azov 

Hellenic ^° ^^^ mouth of the Mediterranean, almost the entire 

colonies. coast, both of continents and islands, was studded 

Their number . , , , r 1 • • 1 

and wide With the settlements of this active and energetic 
diffusion. people. Most thickly were these sown towards the 
north and the north-east, more sparingly towards the south and 
westj where a rival civilisation — the Phoenician — cramped, though 
it could not crush, Grecian enterprise. Carthage and Tyre would 
fain have kept exclusively in their own hands these regions , but 
the Greeks forced themselves in. here and there, as in Egypt and 
in the Cyrena'ica; while of their own northern shore, except in 
Spain, they held exclusive possession, meeting their rivals in the 
islands of Corsica, Sardinia, Sicily, and Cyprus. 

2,. The main causes of the spread of the Greeks from their 

proper home in the Hellenic peninsula, over so many and such 

Origin of distant regions, were two in number. The race was 

mentrtwo- proHfic, and often found itself cramped for room, 

fold. either from the mere natural increase of population, 

or from the pressure upon it of larger and more powerful nations. 

Hence arose movements, which were, properly speaking, migrafions, 

though the term 'colonisation' has been improperly applied to 

them. To this class belong the ^olian, Ionian, and Dorian 

settlements in Asia, and the Achsean in Italy. But the more 

usual cause of movement was commercial or political enterprise, 

the state which founded a settlement being desirous of extending 



PER. II. PAET II.] COLONIES. 147 

its influence or its trade into a new region. Such settlements 
were colonies proper j and between these and the mother country 
there was always, at any rate at first, a certain connection, which 
was absent in the case of settlements arising out of migrations. 
Occasionally individual caprice or political disturbance led to the 
foundation of a new city ; but such cases were comparatively rare, 
and require only a passing mention. 

3. The colonies proper of the Greeks were of two kinds, anoiKiai 
and Kkt]pov%iai. In the former, the political connection between 
the mother country and the colony was slight and colonies 
weak: in the latter, it was exceedingly close and proper. 

, , ■ r -11 Their relation 

strong. AiToiKiat, were, in fact, independent com- ^vith their 
munities, attached to the mother country merely by P^'^nt states. 
affection and by certain generally prevalent usages, which, how- 
ever, were neither altogether obligatory nor very definite. The 
colony usually worshipped as a hero its original founder (otKio-r?js), 
and honoured the same gods as the parent city. It bore part in 
the great festivals of its metropolis^ and contributed offerings to 
them. It distinguished by special honours at its 'A-iroiKiai, 
own games and festivals the citizens of the parent ^^w^^^fferent 
community. It used the same emblems upon its K\ripovxiat. 
coins. Its chief priests were, in some instances, drawn continually 
from the mother state j and, if it designed to found a new settle- 
ment itself, it sought a leader from the same quarter. War 
between a parent city and a colony was regarded as impious, and 
a certain obligation lay on each to assist the other in times of 
danger. But the observance of these various usages was altogether 
voluntary ; no attempt was ever made to enforce them, the com- 
plete political independence of the airoiKia being always understood 
and acknowledged. In the KXrjpovx^a the case was wholly different. 
There the state sent out a body of its citizens to form a new com- 
munity in territory which it regarded as its own; the settlers 
retained all their rights as citizens of their old country, and in 
their new one were mainly a garrison intended to maintain the 
authority of those who sent them out. The dependence of 
KXrjpovx^ai on the parent state was thus entire and absolute. The 
cleruchs were merely citizens of their old state, to whom certain 
special duties had been assigned and certain benefits granted. 

4. The Greek settlements of whatsoever kind may be divided 
geographically into the Eastern, the Western, and the Southern. 

L 2 



148 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

Under the first head will come those of the eastern and northern 
Geographical shores of the T^gean, those of the Propontis, of 

*^o?thT ^^^ ^^^c^ S^^^ ^^^ of ^^^ S^^ of ^20^ '■> ^n^er the 
settlements, second, those of Italy, Sicily, Gaul, Spain, and the 

adjacent islands j under the third, those of Africa. The order of 

this arrangement coincides, speaking broadly, with the chronological 

succession, and it will therefore be observed in the summary now 



to be given. 



Colonies of the Eastern Group. 



i. On the East Coast of the Mgean. These colonies are usually subdivided into 
the ^Eolian, the Ionian, and the Dorian, or those on the Mysian, those on the 
Lydian, and those on the Garian seaboard. 

{a) ilhe yEolian Colonies. The origin of these colonies is to be sought in the 
first of the two great migratory movements in Greece Proper. When the 
Boeotians, driven out of Arne in Thessaly, dispossessed the Cadmeians, Minyee, 
and others of the tract thenceforward known as Boeotia, a portion of the 
inhabitants, including a number of refugees, quit,ted the country and proceeded 
in search of new homes under Boeotian (i. e. iEohan) leaders. (See above, 
First Period, §§ 9 and 11.) Following the course of the Trojan expedition, 
these emigrants reached the north-western corner of Asia Minor, and there 
established themselves on the coast and in the islands. In Tenedos they 
founded a single city of the same name ; in Lesbos they built five towns, 
Mytilene, Methymna, Antissa, Eresus, and Pyrrha, all of them on the coast ; 
upon the mainland they made twelve settlements, Smyrna, Cuma (or Phri- 
conis), Myrina, Gryneium, and Pitane, upon the coast, Temnus, Larissa, 
Neonteichos, ^gse, certainly, and Cilia, Notium, and J^giroessa, probably, in 
the interior. Of these cities Smyrna, which after a while joined the Ionian 
confederacy, and Cuma (or Cyme) were the most important. In Lesbos, 
Mytilen6 obtained an ascendancy over the other towns, having, however, 
always a jealous rival in Methymna. ' The iEolian power was spread con- 
siderably beyond its original limits by the colonising efforts of Cuma and 
Lesbos. The tract between the Gulf of Adramyttium and the Hellespont 
became ^Eolian, its chief towns being Antandrus, Gargara, and Assus. Sestus, 
too, in the Chersonese, and ^nus on the coast of Thrace, were ^olian colo- 
nies. The ^olian towns seem in general to have been independent of one 
another ; and there is no evidence that they formed at any time a confederacy, 
or even an Amphictyony. Their forms of government were various, and often 
suffered revolutionary changes. Mytilene, in particular, suffered much from 
internal commotion, till Pittacus (about B.C. 600), as dictator (atVu/xf^jrjys), 
established tranquillity. Continental ^Eolis maintained its independence till 
the time of Croesus (B.C. 568), when it was conquered together with Ionia 
and Doris. In B.C. 554 it passed under the sceptre of Persia. Lesbos con- 
tinued free till somewhat later, but was subjected before the expedition of 
Cambyses against Egypt, B.C. 525. She took an important part in the Ionian 
revolt (B.C. 500 to 494), and was severely punished at its conclusion, B.C. 493. 
At the same time, Tenedos was subjugated. After the battle of Salamis, 
Lesbos recovered its independence, and in B.C. 477 became a member of the 
Athenian confederacy. For many years it was treated with special favour by 
Athens, but revolting early in the Peloponnesian War (b.c. 428), was con- 
quered, and experienced great harshness. A second revolt, B.C. 412, was 
equally unsuccessful. After iEgos-potami (b. c, 404), Lesbos fell under Spartan 
influence, but was recovered to Athens in B.C. 390, and continued a depen- 



PER. II. PART II.] COLONIES. 149 

dency until its freedom was established by the Peace of Antalcidas, B.C. 387. 
In B.C. 334 it submitted to Alexander. 

Special works on Lesbos, worthy of the student's attention, are — 

V'L^U^yS.'L., Lesbiacorum librer. Berlin, 1826; 8vo. And 
Lander, Beitriige ■zur Kunde der Insel Lesbos. Hamburg, 1827. 

(^) TJ^e Ionian Colonies. The Ionian colonies were regarded by the Greeks 
as having been founded somewhat later than the iEolian. Their origin is to 
be sought in the second or great Dorian migration. An Ionian population, 
expelled from the northern coast of the Peloponnese by the fugitive Achaeans, 
sought a refuge in Attica, where it was kindly harboured for a while ; but the 
narrow, infertile, and already well-peopled Attica being insufficient for its 
needs, a migratory movement began across the yEgean Sea. Ceos, Cythnus, 
Seriphus, Siphnus, Paros, Naxos, Syros, Andros, Tenos, Rheneia, Delos, and 
Myconus were successively occupied by Ionian colonists, who went out in 
some cases under Attic leaders. From the more eastern of these islands the 
passage was easy to Asia. Between B.C. 1000 and 800 a series of settlements 
were made on the Asiatic coasts and islands, directly below the settlements 
of the Cohans, by a stream of emigrants predominantly Ionian, though com- 
prising also a great intermixture of races, as Abantes, Minyae, Cadmeians, 
Dryopians, Phocians, Molossians, Arcadians, Epidaurian Dorians, and others. 
Twelve of these settlements were pre-eminent, and formed together an 
Amphictyony, which had its place of meeting at the temple of Neptune, called 
the ' Panionium,' situated on the headland of Mycale, opposite Samos. The 
twelve were Miletus, Myus, Priene, Ephesus, Colophon, Lebedus, Teos, 
Erythrae, Clazomense, and Phocaea, upon the mainland, Samos and Chios upon 
islands. Of these by far the most important in the early times were Miletus, 
Phocsea, and Samos. Miletus was the first to develop into a powerful state. 
As early as B.C. 780 she began to send out that series of colonies which formed 
her chief glory, and gave her the name of Hecatompolis. The Hellespont, 
the Propontis, the Euxine, and the Sea of Azov, for the most part, received 
these settlements, of which an account will be given under other heads. About 
B.C. 600 Phocaea became distinguished. Her mariners were the first Greeks 
who explored the Adriatic Sea and the Western Mediterranean, and the only 
Greeks who are known to have ever adventured themselves beyond the pillars 
of Hercules into the Atlantic Ocean. They traded with Tartessus in Spain, 
founded Alalia in Corsica, Massilia on the coast of Gaul, and Elea, or Velia 
(Vela) in Italy. The rise of Samos to greatness was not much prior to 
B.C. 540. She owed her splendour chiefly to the tyrant Polycrates, the friend 
of Amasis of Egypt, under whom the arts flourished, commerce was developed, 
and the dominion of Samos extended over many of the jEgean islands. The 
Ionian Greeks maintained their independence uninterruptedly till the rise of 
the Mermnad dynasty in Lydia, when they were made the object of a series 
of attacks by the Lydian kings, which led to their gradual subjection. Colo- 
phon was reduced by Gyges, about B.C. 700; Priene by Ardys, about 650; 
Smyrna, after it had become Ionian, by Alyattes, about B.C. 620. Miletus, 
which had been attacked, successively, by every Mermnad king, was finally 
forced, with the rest of the Ionian towns, to submit to Croesus, about B.C. 565. 
On the fall of the Lydian empire, B.C. 554, all the Ionian states, except Chios 
and Samos, passed under the yoke of Persia. Chios and Samos seem to have 
submitted to Cambyses, about B.C. 526. About this time it appears that most 
of the states were under the government of tyrants. The machinations of 
one of these, Histiaeus of Miletus, and of his vicegerent, Aristagoras, led to 
the great revolt in the reign of Darius Hystaspis (b.c. 500), suppressed after 
six years of struggle with a severity which completely broke the power of 
Miletus and greatly reduced that of almost all the other states. Henceforth 
the most important states were Samos, Chios, and Ephesus. Samos, which 
invited the Greek fleet to Asia after Salamis (b.c. 479), and played an 



I50 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

important part at Mycale, entered readily into the Athenian confederacy, 
B.C. 477, and supported the measures by which Athens established her empire, 
but revolting in B.C. 440, was forcibly reduced by Pericles. She remained 
faithful to Athens throughout the Peloponnesian War, during the later part 
of which she was the head-quarters of Athenian power. Becoming free in 
B.C. 404, she was, about B.C. 380, recovered by Persia. Reconquered by 
Timotheus in B.C. 365, she passed into the number of Athenian cleruchice, 
and occupied this position till the time of Alexander. Chios, which 
revolted from Persia after Mycale, became, like Samos, a member of the 
Athenian confederacy in B.C. 477, and continued faithful till B.C. 413, when 
it made alliance with the Spartans. The attempts of Athens to recover it by 
force of arms all failed; but in B.C. 378 it entered voluntarily into the restored 
Athenian confederation, in which it continued till B.C. 358, when, in conjunction 
with Cos, Rhodes, and Byzantium, it seceded. The ' Social War ' followed, 
by which Chios re-established her independence, B.C. 356. In B.C. 333 Chios 
was recovered to Persia by Memnon of Rhodes, but the next year it sub- 
mitted to Alexander. Ephesus, insignificant during the early times, acquired 
the favour of the Persians by abstention from the Ionian revolt. Thenceforth 
it grew in power and wealth, succeeding apparently to the commercial position 
of Miletus and Phocaea. Its great glory was its Temple of Artemis, which 
was twice burnt — first by the Cimmerians, about B.C. 650, and again (b.c. 356) 
by Herostratus. In the Macedonian and Roman times, Ephesus was regarded 
as the first city of Asia Minor. 

Several important works have been written on the history of Miletus. 
Among them may be noticed — 

RambaCH, F. E., De Mileto ejusque coloniis. Halle, 1790; 4to. 

SoLDAN, G. T., Rerum Milesiarum commentarius. Darmstadt, 1829. 

Schroder, A., Rerum Milesiarum partkula I. Stralsund, 1827. 

The best and fullest account of the history of Samos will be found in 

Panofka, T., Res Samiorum. Berlin, 1822. 

(c) The Dorian Colonies. These colonies issued from the Peloponnese 
during the time that the Dorians were gradually conquering it. The bulk of 
the colonists were often of some other race (as Achseans, Minyse, &c.) ; but 
they went out under Doric leaders. The course taken by the emigrants was 
through the southern Cyclades, where Melos, Pholegandrus, Thera, Anaphe, 
and Astypalsea were reckoned as Dorian settlements. But the most important 
of the colonies were planted on the Asiatic coast and in the littoral islands. 
Three in Rhodes, lalyssus, Lindus, and Cameirus ; one in Cos, bearing the 
same name as the island; and two upon the mainland, Halicarnassus and Cnidus, 
formed originally an Amphictyony, which met at the Triopium, or Temple of 
Apollo Triopius, situated near the last-named city. But Halicarnassus, after 
a while, was excluded from the confederation. Other cities of Dorian origin, 
which did not, however, at any time belong to the Amphictyony, seem to have 
been Myndus, near Halicarnassus, and Phaselis, on the coast of Lycia. The 
islands Calymna, Nisyrus, Telos, and Chalcia had also a Doric population. The 
Dorian colonies maintained their independence from their original foundation 
to the time of Croesus, who reduced Halicarnassus, Myndus, and Cnidus. At 
the fall of the Lydian empire, these cities transferred their allegiance to Persia ; 
and their example was followed by the island towns when Phoenicia submitted 
to Cambyses. The Dorians took no part in the Ionian revolt ; and the cities 
were for the most part undistinguished until the time of Alexander. Halicar- 
nassus, the birth-place of Herodotus, forms the only notable exception. Here, 
under the Persian kings, a dynasty of Hellenized Carians established itself, 
which held not only Halicarnassus, but most of Caria, together with Cos, 
Calymna, and Nisyrus. To this belonged, 1. A king, whose name is unknown, 
about B.C. 500, contemporary with Darius; 2. Artemisia, his widow, con- 
temporary with and in the confidence of Xerxes, B.C. 480 ; 3. Pisindelis, her son, 



PER. II. PAET IT.] COLONIES. 151 

about B.C. 460; 4. Lygdamis, son of Pisindelis, about B.C. 450, Under him 
the monarchy came to an end, and Halicarnassus joined the Athenian con- 
federacy. It Mas recovered by Persia after the Peace of Antalcidas, B.C. 387 ; 
and the old royal family seems to have been restored. We find, 5. Hecatom- 
nus, king B.C. 380. He is succeeded, about B.C. 377, by 6. his son, Mausolus, 
who is followed by his widow and sister, 7. Artemisia II, B.C. 353, the builder 
of the famous 'Mausoleum.' Artemisia dying, B.C. 351, the crown falls to 
8. Idrieus, second son of Hecatomnus, who reigns seven years, and is succeeded 
by his widow and sister, 9. Ada. She is driven out, after reigning four years, 
by 10. her brother, Pixodarus, the third son of Hecatomnus, who dies after a 
reign of five years, B. c. 335 ; and is followed by 11. his son-in-law, Orontobates, 
king when the city is besieged by Alexander. 

The sites of Cnidus and Halicarnassus have recently been very carefully 
explored. For a full account of the explorations, see the magnificently 
illustrated work of Mr. Newton, entitled, A History of Discoveries at Halicar- 
nassus, Cnidus, and Branchidce. London, 1862 ; 2 vols, folio. 

A good monograph on the subject of Cos was published in 1833 by Kuster. 
(^De Co insula. Haile ; 8vo.) 

ii. On the North Coast of the JEgean. These settlements extended almost 
continuously along the entire coast from Methone in Pieria to the Chersonese. 
They may be divided into western, central, and eastern. 

(a) Western Group. This comprised Methone, on the eastern coast of the 
Thermaic Gulf, which was a colony from Eretria, founded about B.C. 730, and 
the settlements of the Chalcidic peninsula, including those of the three long 
projections from it, Pallene, Sithonia, and Acte, or the peninsula of Athos. 
The greater part of the settlements in this quarter were made by the town of 
Chalcis in Euboea, but some were from Eretria, and several from Andros. 
Potidcea, the most important of them all in the early times, was a colony 
from Corinth. The cities of Chalcidian origin were chiefly in Sithonia ; they 
included Torone, Singus, Sermyle, Galepsus, and Mecyberna. Olynthus became 
a Chalcidian possession in B.C. 480. The colonies of Eretria were mainly in 
Pallene. Among these the most important was Mende. Andros founded Sane, 
near the site of the canal of Xerxes, and Acanthus, Stageirus, and Argilus, on 
the coast between Athos and Amphipolis. Chalcidice first became a power in 
the Peloponnesian War, when its cities, encouraged by Brasidas, revolted 
from Athens, B.C. 424. It joined the league headed by Argos after the Peace 
of Nicias, B.C. 421, and the restored Spartan confederacy in B.C. 418. Soon 
after the close of the Peloponnesian War, Olynthus acquired a preponderating 
influence in Chalcidice, and became the head of a league which carried on war 
successfully with Macedon, B.C. 392 to 383 ; but, provoking by these successes 
the jealousy of Sparta, Olynthus was attacked by that state, and forced to 
become one of her subject allies. Subsequently the power of the Olynthians 
was much curtailed by Athens, B.C. 368 to 363 ; and they were consequently 
unable to resist the attacks of Philip, even though assisted by Athens, who too 
late saw her error. Olynthus fell in B.C. 347, and Chalcidice was swallowed 
up in Macedon. 

(JT) Central Group. This consisted of the cities from the Strymon to the 
Nestus, which were Amphipolis, E'ion, Myrcinus, ApoUonia, Galepsus, 
CEsyme, Neapolis, Datum, Scapte-Hyle, and Crenides (afterwards Philippi). 
The earhest of these settlements seem to have been made from Thasos, after 
it had received its Parian colony ; these were Datum, Scapte-Hyle, CEsyme, 
and Galepsus. Myrcinus, on the Strymonic Lake, was founded by Histiseus of 
Miletus about B.C. 508. Amphipolis, founded by Athens B.C. 465 (re-founded 
B.C. 437), grew at once into vast importance from the advantages of its site. It 
revolted from the Athenians B.C. 424, and, in alliance with Olynthus, resisted 
all their efforts to subdue it. In B.C. 358 it was taken and annexed by Philip. 

(c) Eastern Group. Under this head come the settlements between the Nestus 
and the Hellespont, of which the chief were Abdera, founded by the Teians, 



152 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

when their city was threatened by Harpagus, about B.C. 553 ; Maroneia, a 
colony of Chios ; Mesambria, of Samothrace ; Cardia, of Miletus and Clazomenee ; 
Elaeus, of Teos ; ^nos, Alopeconnesus, and Sestos of iEolis. Of these Cardia, 
Elaeus, Alopeconnesus, and Sestos were situated in the Chersonese, where were 
also the Greek cities of Madytus, Callipolis, and Pactya. The Chersonese 
became a single kingdom under the first Miltiades, about B.C. 560. He was 
succeeded, about B.C. 523, by his nephew, Stesagoras, who was followed, about 
B.C. 516, by his brother, the second Miltiades, The Persians conquered it in 
B.C. 493, and held it till B.C. 479. After this it was alternately subject to 
Athens and Sparta, till the battle of Chaeroneia transferred the headship of 
Greece to Macedon. 

iii. Colonies of the Propontis. On the Asiatic shores of the Propontis and the 
Bosphorus stood Lampsacus, a joint colony of the Phoceeans and Milesians ; 
Parium, a colony of Erythrge ; Priapus, Artace, Cyzicus, and Cius, colonies of 
Miletus ; and Clialcedon, a colony of Megara. On the opposite or European 
shores were Bisanthe and Perinthus, colonies of the Samians, and Byzantium, 
like Chalcedon, a colony of the Megarians. In mid sea was Proconnesus, a 
colony of the Milesians. Of these settlements Byzantium was, owing to its 
situation, by far the most important. It commanded the entrance to the 
Black Sea, and consequently controlled at its will the important trade which 
the Greeks carried on, chiefly for corn, with Thrace and Scythia. Cyzicus, 
Bisanthe, and Perinthus were also places of some consequence. 

On early Byzantine history the student may consult with profit — 

Heyne's Antiquitates ByzantinoB ; Comment ationes ducB. Gottingen, 1809; 8vo. 

iv. Colonies of the Euxine, the Cimmerian Bosphorus, and the Palus Mceotis. 
These colonies were chiefly founded by Miletus ; but a few of the most 
important proceeded from Megara. They extended almost continuously along 
the northern coast of Asia Minor and the eastern coast of Thrace, but were 
only occasional between the mouth of the Danube and that of the Phasis. We 
may subdivide them into {a) those in Thrace, {b) those in Scythia, and 
(c) those in Asia, south of the Caucasus. 

(«) Colonies on the East Coast of Thrace. Proceeding northwards from the Bos- 
phorus, the most important settlements were Apollonia, Mesambria, Odessus, 
Callatis, Tomi, the scene of Ovid's exile, and Istria or Istropolis. Of these, 
Apollonia, Odessus, Callatis, Tomi, and Istria were Milesian settlements, while 
Mesambria was a colony of the Megarians. They were mostly founded in the 
course of the seventh century. Odessus, Tomi, Callatis, Mesambria, and 
Apollonia were at one time united in a league, the presidency of which belonged 
to Odessus. Commercially, the most important of the Thracian settlements 
seems to have been Istropolis. 

(1^) Colonies on the Coast of Scythia. The chief of these were Tyras, at the mouth 
of the Tyras (Dniester) ; Olbia, on the estuary of the Hypanis (Bog) ; Cherso- 
nesus Heracleiotica, near the site of the modern Sebastopol ; Theudosia, on the 
site of Kaffa ; Panticapeeum (afterwards Bosporus), near the modern Kertch ; 
Phanagoria, on the Asiatic coast opposite ; and Tanais, in the extreme recess 
of the Palus Moeotis, at the mouth of the similarly named river. With the 
single exception of Chersonesus Heracleiotica, these cities were all colonies of 
Miletus, founded chiefly in the eighth century. Chersonesus was a colony from 
Heracleia Pontica, on the opposite coast of Asia Minor, which was itself a 
colony from Megara. It was founded, probably, about the middle of the fifth 
century. In the early times, Olbia was the most important of the Scythian 
colonies ; but about B.C. 480 Panticapgeum became the great city of these parts. 
It was the capital of a Graeco-Scythic kingdom, called that Of the Bosporus, which 
extended westward beyond Theudosia, and eastward to the mouth of the 
Kouban, thus including both Theudosia and Phanagoria, A list of the kings is 
given by Diodorus. 1. Spartacus I, reigned from B.C. 438 to 431. 2. Seleucus, 
reigned from B.C. 431 to 427. 3. Satyrus I, reigned from B.C. 407 to 393. 



PER. II. PAKT II.] COLONIES. 163 

4. Leucon, his son, reigned from B.C. 393 to 353. 5. Spartacus 11, his son, 
reigned from B.C. 353 to 348, 6. Parysades I, his brother, reigned from 
B.C. 34S to 310. 7. Satyrus II, his son, reigned nine months. 8. Prytanis, his 
brother, was deposed by 9. Eumekis, also his brother, who reigned five years, 
from B.C. 309 to 304. He was succeeded by 10. Spartacus III, his son, who 
reigned 20 years, from B.C. 304 to 284. The kingdom seems to have remained 
after this in the same family till about B.C. no, when it was handed over by 
Parysades II to the great Mithridates. The kings of Bosporus, especially 
Satyrus I, and his son, Leucon, were on terms of close friendship with Athens, 
which depended mainly on Bosporus for its corn supplies. 

(c) Colonies of the Asiatic Coast, south of the Caucasus. Commencing at the 
foot of the Caucasus, these were Dioscurias, in the modern Mingrelia, and 
Phasis, at the mouth of the Phasis, early colonies of the Milesians ; Trapezus 
(Trebizond), Cerasus, and Cotyora, colonies of Sinope ; Themiscyra ; Amisus, 
a colony of Phocaea, or perhaps of Miletus ; Sinope, undoubtedly a colony of 
Miletus; and Heracleia Pontica, a colony of Megara, founded about B.C. 560. 
Heracleia, Sinope, and Amisus were all cities of great importance. The first, 
situated in the territory of the Mariandyni, carried on an extensive trade with 
Scythia and Thrace, extended its dominion over the whole of the Marian- 
dynian country, and at one time possessed the entire coast between the San- 
garius and Parthenius rivers. The government was republican, but after 
contests of the usual character between the aristocratical and democratical 
parties, became a tyranny in the person of Clearchus, about B.C. 370. Clear- 
chus was assassinated ; but the crown continued to be held by his descendants 
down to the conquests of Alexander. — Sinope, founded by Miletus, probably 
about B. c. 780, was captured by the Cimmerians at the time of their great inroad, 
and made a sort of head-quarters from which they sent out their expeditions. 
After their expulsion it was recovered by the Milesians, about B.C. 630, and 
rose to great prosperity, becoming itself a colonising power, and exercising a 
great influence over the neighbouring barbarians. The tunny fishery of the 
Euxine, which it shared with Byzantium, was one of the great sources of its 
opulence. — Amisus, founded from Ionia about B.C. 600, received an Athenian 
colony about B.C. 450, and became shortly afterwards one of the most flourish- 
ing of the Black Sea settlements. It attained, however, its greatest prosperity 
under the kings of Pontus, B.C. 380 to 64, who sometimes made it their capital. 



Colonies of the Western Group. 

The colonies of the Western group include those on the Illyrian coast ; 
those in Italy ; those in Sicily ; those on the coasts of Gaul and Spain ; and 
those in Corsica and Sardinia. 

i. Colonies on the Coast of Illyria. The two principal settlements in these 
parts were Apollonia and Epidamnus, the former a colony from Corinth, the 
latter from Corcyra. Epidamnus was founded about B.C. 625. It had a 
highly oligarchical constitution ; but in course of time a democratical spirit 
arose, the state was revolutionised, and most of the oligarchs exiled. Hence 
arose the struggle which, as much as anything, brought on the Peloponnesian 
War. Corinth assisted the oligarchs, Corcyra the democratic faction. The 
result is unknown to us ; but it is probable that the Corcyraeans were 
the victors. From about B.C. 312 Epidamnus was subject to attacks on 
the part of the Illyrians, which induced her, about B.C. 227, to place herself 
under the protection of the Romans. The Romans commonly called the city 
Dyrrhachium. Apollonia, founded by Periander, about B.C. 600, was compa- 
ratively insignificant until Roman times, when it became the seat of a 
university, and acquired a great reputation. Other Greek settlements on this 
coast were Oricus, near Apollonia ; Lissus, north of Epidamnus, founded by 



154 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

the elder Dionysius ; and Epidaurus, north-west of Lissus ; but these were of 
small importance. 

ii. Colonies in Italy. These settlements commenced in lapygia, and were 
continued at brief intervals along the entire coast from the extreme eastern 
point of Italy to Campania on its western shores. The most important were 
Taras, or Tarentum, in the inner recess of the gulf bearing the same name ; 
Metapontum, Sybaris, and Thurii, on the western coast of the same gulf; Cro- 
ton, at its south-western extremity ; Locri Epizephyrii, lower down, near the 
southern point of Bruttium ; Rhegium, opposite Zancle in Sicily ; Laiis, at the 
mouth of the Laiis river ; Elea, or Velia, on the coast of Lucania ; Posidonia, 
afterwards Paestum, near the mouth of the Silarus ; Palseopolis and Neapolis, 
in the bay of Naples ; and Cyme (Cumae), beyond the northern extremity 
of the bay, near Lake Avernus. Of inferior importance were Hydrus and 
Callipolis in lapygia, dependencies of Tarentum ; Heracleia and Siris, south 
of Metapontum, colonies respectively of Tarentum and Colophon ; Caulonia, 
near Locri Epizephyrii, and Terina, on the opposite coast, colonies of Croton ; 
Hipponium, south, and Temesa, north of Terina, colonies of Locri Epize- 
phyrii ; Pyxus (Buxentum), between Laiis and Veha, probably a colony of 
Siris ; and Dicaearchia (Puteoli), near Baiae, a colony of Cumae. A special 
historical interest attaches to the following cities : — 

{a) Taras, or Tarentum. Founded from Sparta by the discontented Parthenii, 
about B.C. 708. At first overshadowed by the greatness of the Achaean cities, 
Metapontum, Sybaris, and Croton ; but gradually raised to the first position 
among the Italic states by the excellence of its harbour and the vigour of its 
semi- Spartan people. Engaged in friendly commerce with Corinth as early as 
B.C. 600. Carried on successful wars with the Messapians and Peucetians, 
suffering, however, occasional defeat (as in B.C. 473). Resisted the founda- 
tion of Thurii, B.C. 443 to 433 ; but founded Heracleia in conjunction with the 
Thurlans, B.C. 432. Held aloof from the struggle between Athens and Syra- 
cuse, B.C. 415 to 413. Raised to the head of the Italic confederacy against the 
Lucanians, about B.C. 350. Carried on long wars with frequent foreign aid, 
inviting successively Archidamus of Sparta, Alexander of Epirus, and Cleony- 
mus of Sparta to its assistance. Came into hostile collision with Rome, 
B.C. 281, and invited Pyrrhus into Italy. Forced to submit to Rome, B.C. 273. 
Played an important part in the Second Punic War, B. c. 2 1 2 to 209, but after its 
capture by Fabius sank into a mere luxurious watering-place. The govern- 
ment of Tarentum was originally an aristocracy on the Spartan model, with 
kings presiding over it; but after the great defeat of the year B.C. 473, it 
became a decided democracy. The place of the king was taken by an annually 
elected Strategus ; and the lot was introduced and extended to a full half of 
the magistrates. Archytas, the Pythagorean philosopher, held the office of 
Strategus for seven years in succession (about B.C. 370). 

(b') Metapontum. Founded by Achaeans from the Peloponnese, about 
B.C. 700 to 690, at the instance of Croton and Sybaris, which wished to be 
strengthened against Tarentum. Joined in a league with those two cities 
against the Ionian Siris, which effected the destruction of that place, about the 
middle of the sixth century B.C. Received Pythagoras on his expulsion from 
Crotona, about B.C. 520. Joined the Athenians in their attempt to conquer 
Sicily, B.C. 414. Made alliance with Alexander of Epirus, B.C. 332. Opposed 
Cleonymus, B.C. 303. Assisted Pyrrhus and Hannibal. Fell under the power 
of Rome, B.C. 207. 

(f) Sybaris, the earliest of the Greek settlements in this part of Italy, was 
founded by the Achaeans, about B.C. 720, and rapidly attained a great and 
extraordinary prosperity, which we must ascribe in part to the remarkable 
fertility of the territory, in part to the hold which the city obtained, through 
priority of settlement, on the Italian trade. Situated at a point where Italy is 
abnormally narrow, Sybaris was able to extend her dominion from sea to sea. 
She brought under several tribes of the CEnotrians, and planted colonies on the 



PEK. 11. PART 11.] COLONIES. 155 

western coast of Italy, as especially Posidonia and Laiis. It was a peculiarity 
of her policy to admit strangers freely to her citizenship ; and hence her popu- 
lation increased so enormously that, we are told, she could bring into the field 
300,000 men. At the same time, luxury made rapid strides, and the Sybarites 
became proverbial for their refinement and their effeminate habits. Their 
trade was extensive. They had an important commerce with Miletus, and 
probably were for a time the chief carriers between the east and west, or at any 
rate divided with the Phoenicians this very profitable traffic. The most flourish- 
ing time of Sybaris was from B.C. 600 to 550. Its fall was caused by political 
dissensions. The old oligarchical government was succeeded, about B.C. 520, 
by a democracy, which was soon exchanged for a tyranny, one Telys obtaining 
the supreme power. Telys banished 500 of the oligarchs, who fled to Croton, 
and that city espousing their cause, a war followed, which terminated in the 
complete destruction of Sybaris, B.C. 510. Efforts were made to re-establish 
the fallen city, but they failed ; and, instead of a new Sybaris, there arose 
near it the important city of Thurii. The Sybarites found a refuge in their 
colonies, Laiis and Scidrus. 

{£) Thurii. This city was founded by Pericles, B. c. 443, and was no doubt 
intended by him to strengthen the Athenian interest in a part of the Grecian 
world which was almost wholly under the influence of Sparta. Its population 
was from the first of a mixed character, including a number of the old 
Sybarites, Greeks from various parts of the Peloponnese, Ionian Greeks, and 
others. Quarrels soon arose, especially between the Sybarites and the new 
comers. The former were worsted and expelled. Fresh colonists were then 
invited from all parts of Greece ; and the state was modelled anew on a de- 
mocratic basis, but one in which the various ethnic elements were recognised 
and made the basis of the political organisation. The legal code of Charondas 
was accepted. Thurii now gi-ew in power, and provoking the jealousy of 
Tarentum was attacked by that state, but succeeded in maintaining its inde- 
pendence. In the Peloponnesian War, the Thurians, after some hesitation, 
joined the Athenians, B.C. 413, but revolted after the Sicilian disasters, and 
expelled the portion of the population which especially favoured Athens. 
Soon after this, Thurii was attacked by the Lucanians ; and a long war fol- 
lowed, generally to the disadvantage of the Thurians, who suflfered one very 
signal defeat, B.C. 390. About B.C. 286 they implored the aid of the Romans, 
which brought upon them a new enemy in the Tarentines, who took and 
plundered the city, B. c. 283. Thurii was from this time a Roman dependency, 
occasionally wavering in its allegiance, as especially during the Second Punic 
War. It gradually declined in power, and at length, B.C. 194, received a 
Roman colony, and ceased altogether to be a distinct state. 

(e) Croton, or Crotona, was founded by Achaeans from the Peloponnese, shortly 
after the foundation of Sybaris, B.C. 710 probably. It rapidly rose to almost 
equal prosperity with its sister city, sending out colonies to Caulonia, near 
Locri, and to Terina on the opposite or western coast of Italy, and exercising 
a paramount authority over all the native races in its neighbourhood. Less 
populous than Sybaris, but still able to bring into the field armies of 100,000 
men and upwards, it compensated for this inferiority by a special attention to 
athletic training, an attention evidenced by the number of Crotoniat victors 
at the Olympic Games. At the same time its citizens cultivated with success 
the science of medicine. The first war in which we find Croton engaged was 
one with the Locrians and Rhegines, who completely defeated her forces at 
the river Sagras, about B.C. 550. Soon after this she received the Samian 
refugee Pythagoras, who quickly acquired a great influence in the state by 
the secret society which he set up. The government was at the time a mode- 
rate oligarchy, power being in the hands of a Council of One Thousand, the 
descendants and representatives of the original settlers. The Pythagoreans 
were suspected of an intention to narrow the basis of the government, and 
were consequently expelled about B.C. 510, the constitution being at the same 



156 GRECIAN STATES. [book m. 

time revolutionised in a democratical sense. The Council of One Thousand was 
superseded by a new senate, taken by lot from the whole body of the citizens ; 
and the principle was established that all magistrates should be accountable at 
the expiration of their term of office. This expulsion took place notwith- 
standing a signal military success gained during the Pythagorean ascendancy, 
and attributable in great measure to the Pythagorean athlete, Milo. It was 
while the friends of Pythagoras were still in power that Groton received the 
banished Sybarites, rejecting the demand of Telys for their surrender (see 
above, § c), and met and defeated the Sybarite army on the banks of the 
river Traeis. Milo commanded in this battle, and the conquest of Sybaris 
was his doing. After these successes, Croton was without a rival in Italy, her 
power exceeding even that of Tarentum. She continued to flourish till the 
rise of the Sicilian tyrants, when she became subject to their attacks, and 
suffered much at their hands. Dionysius I, in B.C. 389, and Agathocles, in 
B. c. 299, took Croton. During the war with Pyrrhus, it passed into the pos- 
session of Rome, B.C. 277. 

(_/) Locri Epizephyrii. There can be little doubt that this city was, if not 
originally, yet at any rate ultimately and predominantly, a colony either of the 
Ozolian or the Opuntian Locrians, since no other probable account can be 
given of its name. Various dates are assigned to the settlement, which was 
probably not much later than B.C. 700. The legislation of Zaleucus, about 
B. c. 660, gave to Locri its chief celebrity. His laws, which continued in force 
for above two hundred years, were regarded as among the best in Greece ; 
and the quiet and good government for which Locri was famous were in 
a great measure ascribed to them. It is uncertain whether Zaleucus framed 
the constitution, or found it already in existence. The said constitution was 
oligarchical, but on a tolerably broad basis. A hundred houses formed an 
exclusive nobility, but the chief power was in the hands of a council con- 
taining a thousand members, who are thought to have been elected freely from 
the people. Locri was in the early times subject to attacks on the part of 
Croton, but successfully resisted them and obtained an ample vengeance on 
its assailants by the important victory of the Sagras. (See the last section.) 
Though less populous, and on the whole less powerful than either Croton or 
Sybaris, she flourished longer than either, her prosperity continuing for more 
than three centuries, from B.C. 660 to 356. She was, during the greater part 
of this time, on terms of close friendship with Syracuse, which assisted her 
against Rhegium and Croton, enlarging her dominions at the expense of the 
latter. Her misfortunes, however, began from this quarter. Having admitted 
Dionysius II into their city on his expulsion from Syracuse, the Locrians 
suffered grievous oppression at his hands during the space of six years, after 
which they were attacked by the Bruttians, who brought their power very low. 
Before the invasion of Pyrrhus they had submitted to the Romans; and, 
though they subsequently coquetted both with him and with Hannibal, yet 
they may be regarded as substantially a Roman dependency from about 
B.C. 280. 

(g) Rhegium. Founded from Chalcis in Euboea, about B.C. 725. Admitted 
from the first among its colonists a number of Messenian refugees, who were 
subsequently strengthened by accessions, and formed the ruling class in the 
community. The Council of One Thousand, which in Rhegium, as in Thurii 
and Croton, had the chief direction of affairs, was composed exclusively of 
Messenians ; and from them were drawn the chief magistrates who administered 
the state. Cramped on the side of Italy by the near neighbourhood of Locri, 
whose territory extended from sea to sea, and with whom she was almost 
constantly -at war, Rhegium cultivated relations with Sicily, and aimed at 
extending her power in that direction. This purpose she accomplished under 
the despot Anaxilas, who made himself master of Zancl6 on the Sicilian coast, 
and changed its name to Messana. Anaxilas reigned from B.C. 494 to 476. 
He was succeeded by his two sons, minors, on behalf of whom ruled for nine 



PER. II. PAET II.] COLONIES. 157 

years the regent Micythus, B.C. 476 to 467. The sons enjoyed the sovereignty 
for no more than six years, being expelled B.C. 461 by a revolution. Rhegium 
now, after a certain time of commotion, settled down into tranquillity, and, 
adopting the laws of Charondas, enjoyed a period of repose. This was dis- 
turbed by the ambitious projects of Dionysius I of Syracuse, against whom 
the Rhegines declared war, B.C. 399, thus initiating the contest which broke 
their power and reduced them from a first-rate to a third-rate state. Rhegium 
was captured and destroyed by Dionysius in B.C. 387; and, though restored 
by the second Dionysius, never afterwards flourished. In the war with 
Pyrrhus, the Rhegines took the side of Rome, and received into their city, as 
a garrison, a body of Campanian troops, who, following the example of the 
Mamertines (see below, p. 160), murdered the inhabitants and seized the 
town, B.C. 280. After the close of the war, B.C. 270, the Romans executed 
these rebellious soldiers, and restored the city to the survivors of the massacre ; 
but thenceforth Rhegium continued a mere dependency of Rome. 

(A) Elea, or Felia. This city was founded by the Phocseans, after their 
calamitous victory off the coast of Etruria over the combined Etruscan and 
Carthaginian fleets, about B.C. 550. Considerably removed from any other 
important Greek city, it flourished greatly and became the seat of the famous 
Eleatic school of philosophy, whose teachers, Parmenides and Zeno, were 
among the masters of Grecian thought. It warred successfully with Posidonia, 
and resisted all the attempts made against its independence by the Lucanians. 
On its first contact with Rome, it was accepted into alliance, and remained 
for many years afcederata civitas, but ultimately received the Roman franchise, 
probably by the Lex Julia, B.C. 90. 

(i) Cumce, or Cyme. Tradition said that Cumae was a colony from Chalcis in 
Euboea, but placed its foundation at an era anterior to the colonising period. 
It was probably founded really about the same time as Naxos in Sicily and 
Rhegium in Italy, i. e. towards the close of the eighth century. From the 
fertility and extent of its territory, it rapidly became a flourishing state. It 
planted the colonies of Misenum, Dicaearchia, Paleepolis, and Neapolis, on the 
bay of Naples, and even joined its mother city, Chalcis, in founding the distant 
settlement of Zancl6 in Sicily. It extended its influence deeply into the 
interior of Campania, and is said to have occupied with colonies the two 
inland cities of Nola and Atella. Towards the close of the sixth century, its 
independence was threatened by Etruria; but the Cumseans, under Aristo- 
demus, succeeded in defeating the immense host brought against them, and 
afterwards, by joining the Latins at Aricia, about B.C. 506, helped to break 
completely the Etruscan land power, and to drive the invader back across 
the Tiber. Aristodemus, thus a double victor, contrived shortly afterwards 
to effect a revolution, and to turn the previously existing oligarchy into a 
despotism. In B.C. 497 he gave a refuge to the last Tarquin, and six years 
afterwards detained the Roman corn-ships as a set-off against his claims on 
the property which Tarquinius had left at Rome. But the harshness of his 
rule brought about his downfall, and on his expulsion (about B.C. 486), the 
oligarchy was restored. Soon after, Etruria renewed her attacks, but this 
time came by sea. The Cumsans implored the aid of Hiero, king of 
Syracuse, whose victory (b.c. 474) over the Etruscan fleet completely de- 
livered them from this danger. But a more dangerous foe was now approach- 
ing. The Samnites, about B.C. 425, began their attacks upon Campania, and 
rapidly overran it. Capua fell, B.C. 423; and Cumae was able to resist only 
three years longer. The city was then taken by storm, the inhabitants 
massacred, and Cumse sank into the condition of a second-rate Campanian 
town. 

The best work on the Greek colonies in Italy is that of 

Heyne, Prolusiones XVT de cinjitatum Grmcarum per Magnam Greeciam et 
Siciliam institutis et legibus. Contained in the seventh volume of his Opuscula. 



158 GRECIAN STATES. [book in. 

iii. Colonies in Sicily. The colonies in Sicily occupied almost the entire 
eastern and southern shores of the island, but were comparatively scanty on 
the north coast. They may best be divided under the two heads of (i) 
Dorian, and (2) Ionian. The chief Dorian settlements were Syracuse and 
Megara Hyblaea, on the east coast, and Gela, Camarina, Acragas or Agri- 
gentum, and Selinus, on the south ; while the chief Ionian were Naxos, Leon- 
tini, Catana, and Zancle, in the east, and Himera in the north of the island. 
Among the settlements of minor importance may be named, Acrae and 
Casmense, colonies of Syracuse ; Euboea, a colony of Megara Hyblaea ; Tau- 
romenium, which succeeded to Naxos ; Mylse, a colony of Zancle ; Calacta, 
a colony from the Peloponnese ; and Heracleia Minoa, a colony of Sehnus. Of 
these Tauromenium and Calacta were comparatively late foundations. 

{a) Syracuse. The history of Syracuse is, to a great extent, the history of 
Sicily. The colony was founded from Corinth, in or about B.C. 735, and 
retained its independence for a space of 5 2 3 years. This space may be sub- 
divided into five lesser periods — viz. (i) from the foundation of the city to the 
commencement of the reign of Gelo, B.C. 736 to 484 ; (2) from the accession 
of Gelo to the expulsion of his brother Thrasybulus, B.C. 484 to 467 ; (3) 
from the expulsion of Thrasybulus to the accession of Dionysius I, B. c. 467 
to 405 ; (4) from the accession of Dionysius I to the expulsion of Dionysius II, 
B.C. 405 to 343 ; and (5) from the expulsion of Dionysius II to the Roman 
conquest, B.C. 343 to 212. First Period, B.C. 736 to 484. Syracuse during 
this time did not rise to any great height of power, being overshadowed by 
the Italian cities Sybaris and Croton. Still', she founded the colonies of 
Acrse and Casmenje, and established a settlement at Camarina, B.C. 601. 
About B.C. 555 Camarina endeavoured to make herself independent, but was 
attacked and destroyed by the parent city. Sixty years later, Syracuse was in 
turn attacked by Hippocrates, tyrant of Gela, who defeated the Syracusans on 
the Helorus, and forced them to cede Camarina. Soon afterwards internal 
troubles broke out. The landed aristocracy (Gamori), who had hitherto held 
exclusive possession of political privileges, were driven out by the lower orders, 
assisted by the slaves. They took refuge at Casmenae, and from thence called 
in the aid of Gelo, tyrant of Gela, who reinstated them, but while so doing 
established himself as despot of the town. Second. Period, B.C. 484 to 467. 
Dynasty of Gelo and his two brothers, Hiero and Thrasybulus. To Gelo is 
attributable the special greatness of Syracuse. Being lord of all eastern and 
south-eastern Sicily, he not only made Syracuse his capital, but vastly increased 
its size and population by transferring to it the inhabitants of various other 
Greek towns. The power of Gelo induced the Greeks of the continent, when 
threatened by Xerxes, B.C. 480, to solicit his aid; and it was not without 
reason that he required, as the condition on which he would grant it, the com- 
mand of the allied forces either by land or sea. Although his offers were de- 
clined, he would still probably have taken part in the great Persian War, had it 
not been for the invasion of Sicily by the Carthaginians in the same year with 
Salamis. The victory of the Himera frustrated the Carthaginian attempt, and 
greatly augmented Gelo's glory and power. He reigned, however, only three 
years longer, dying B.C. 477. His brother, Hiero, then mounted the throne and 
reigned for ten years in great splendour. His naval victory over the Etrus- 
cans has been noticed under the head of Cumse (supra, p. 157). He governed 
the Ionic cities under his sway with some severity, but was popular with his 
Dorian subjects, who were charmed with his brilliant court, his patronage of 
the arts, and his Olympic and other victories. He assisted the Agrigentines in 
throwing off the tyranny of Thrasidaeus, B. c. 472 ; and, dying five years after- 
wards, left his throne to his brother Thrasybulus, B. c. 467. Thrasybulus, 
ruling tyrannically, was expelled from Sicily by a general rising of his subjects, 
after he had reigned eight months. Third Period, B.C. 467 to 405. The fall 
of the Gelonian dynasty was followed by commotions in the other Greek towns 
of Sicily, and by struggles between the various claimants of the lands in the 



PER. II. PAET II.] COLONIES. 159 

several states. The democracies, which were everywhere established, some- 
times used their power harshly ; and numerous civil wars were the consequence. 
However, in B.C. 461, a general congress was held; terms were arranged 
between the opposing parties, and tranquillity was restored. A flourishing 
time succeeded. The various Greek cities were all recognised as independent, 
and a general advance was made in opulence and splendour. Agrigentum 
especially rose to a great height of prosperity. In Syracuse some attempts at 
re-establishing tyranny were checked by the institution of petalism, B.C. 454, 
which, having served its purpose and becoming absurd, was soon afterwards 
discarded. The attempt of the Sicel prince Ducetius to establish a con- 
federacy of the natives against the Greeks (b.c. 451) proved abortive, but had 
the unfortunate result of causing a quarrel between Syracuse and Agrigentum. 
A war followed between the first and second cities of Sicily, terminating in 
the humiliation of the latter, B.C. 446. Syracuse upon this revived her old 
schemes of a supremacy, and began to threaten the independence of the Ghalcidic 
cities, Naxos, Catana, and Leontini. These, about B.C. 428, invoked the aid 
of Athens, which gladly sent them succours in B.C. 427. Alarmed at this inter- 
ference, the Dorian cities called a congress in B.C. 424, which was attended by 
deputies from all the states, Ionic as well as Doric, and a general peace was 
agreed upon. The Athenians quitted the island, but soon found an excuse to 
return, and in B.C. 415 to 413 made their great and disastrous expedition. 
Scarcely was Sicily delivered from this danger, when another, and a worse, 
threatened it. Invited by the Egestaeans, a Carthaginian army under Hannibal 
the son of Gisco invaded Sicily in B.C. 409, and took Selinus and Himera, 
completely defeating the combined forces of the Greeks, (See above, p. 82.) 
Three years afterwards the same commander took Agrigentum. Fourth 
Period, B.C. 405 to 343. Dynasty of the Dionysii. The advance of the 
Carthaginians after the sack of Agrigentum enabled Dionysius to obtain the 
supreme power at Syracuse. His reign commenced ominously by a defeat of 
his forces at Gela, followed by a mutiny of his troops. But a plague breaking 
out in the Carthaginian army, Himilco, who was now in command, consented to 
a peace, by which Carthage obtained almost the whole of the southern coast. 
Dionysius then turned his arms against the Ionian cities and the barbarians of 
the interior. Having reduced in succession Leontini, Naxos, and Catana, and 
established his power over most of the Sicel tribes, he (in B.C. 397) broke 
with Carthage ; recovered, one after another, Camarina, Gela, Agrigentum, 
and Selinus ; and even besieged and took the old Carthaginian settlement, 
Motya. But the next year the fortune of war turned against him. Himilco 
landed in Sicily with a vast army, recovered Motya, Selinus, and the other 
southern towns, took Messana, and even besieged Dionysius in Syracuse. But 
here again a plague spread itself in the Punic army (b.c. 395); the siege was 
raised ; Himilco deserted his troops, and committed suicide. Hostilities 
however continued till B.C. 392, when peace was a second time concluded. 
Dionysius then for some years warred in Italy, forcing Rhegium and other 
places to submit to him, B.C. 387. In B.C. 383, and again in B.C. 368, he 
renewed his attempts to drive the Carthaginians from Sicily, but failed both 
times, and at his death, in B.C. 367, he left them in possession of full one-third 
of the island. Dionysius 1 1 succeeded his father, a weak prince, at first kept 
under restraint by his uncle, Dio. Banishes Dio, B.C. 360. Troubles follow. 
Dio returns, B.C. 357, and rules till B.C. 353, when he is murdered by Calippus, 
who is driven out, B.C. 352, by Hipparinus. In B.C. 346, Dionysius returns 
and occupies Ortygia, while another aspirant to the supreme power, Hicetas, 
holds Achradina, and, to strengthen himself, calls in the Carthaginians. A 
patriotic party in the city applies to Corinth, which sends a body of troops 
under Timoleon, B.C. 344. Successes of Timoleon. Hicetas submits, and 
Dionysius II goes into exile. !Fifth Period, B.C. 343 to 212. Under the 
auspices of Timoleon, republican government was restored to Syracuse. War 
was renewed with the Carthaginians, B. c. 341 ; and the tyrants were put down 



i6o GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

in the Siceliot cities. A grand attempt of Carthage to establish her supremacy 
in B.C. 340 was frustrated by the victory of the Crimesus; and peace was 
made on the old terms, which established the Halycus as the boundary 
between the two powers. A time of prosperity followed, B.C. 340 to 318; 
but in B.C. 317 the adventurer Agathocles made himself master of Syracuse 
and brought terrible calamities upon Sicily. Agathocles first extended his 
power over the Greek cities by the aid of Carthage, after which, turning 
against his allies, he strove to drive them from the island. But the decisive 
victory of Hamilcar at Ecnomus on the Himera (b.c. 310) upset all his plans; 
and nothing was left for him but to attempt a diversion by carrying the war 
into Africa. For four years, from B.C. 310 to 307, Carthage was made to 
tremble for her home dominion ; but the over-bold effort could not be sus- 
tained. Though successful in several engagements, the Greek prince could 
make no impression on Carthage itself; and meanwhile Hamilcar continued 
the war in Sicily and several times assaulted Syracuse. In B.C. 307 Agatho- 
cles was forced to quit Africa, and shortly afterwards he concluded a peace, 
which left the Halycus still the boundary between the two nations. Agatho- 
cles now turned his attention to Italy ; Croton was sacked and the Bruttii 
engaged and defeated. Important results might have followed ; but in B. c. 
289 Agathocles was murdered by Msenon, and with his death affairs in Sicily 
returned to a state of general confusion, Carthage took heart, and recom- 
menced her aggressions. The mercenaries of Agathocles, under the name of 
Mamertini, seized Messana. The Syracusans, in alarm, invited over Pyrrhus 
from Italy, and thereby saved their city, but were obliged to submit for nearly 
three years (b. c. 278 to 276) to the authority of that imperious prince. The 
recall of Pyrrhus to the mainland left Syracuse once more free ; and she 
wisely placed herself under the rule of Hiero II, said to have descended 
from one of the early Syracusan kings, who very soon restored her to her old 
position in Sicily. His war with the Mamertines, which he carried on at first 
single-handed, but afterwards in conjunction with Carthage, involved him for 
a time in hostilities with Rome, B.C. 264 to 263; but from this position he 
skilfully extracted himself by concluding a separate peace with the Romans in 
the last-named year, after which he continued throughout his reign their faithful 
and firm ally. His death, in B.C. 215, led to commotions which proved fatal 
to the independence of Syracuse. His grandson, Hieronymus, was murdered 
b. c. 214. Power was seized by Hippocrates and Epicydes. Syracuse deserted 
Rome, and espoused the side of Carthage. The siege by Marcellus followed, 
which, though protracted through the genius of Archimedes, terminated, 
B.C. 212, in the fall of the city and the absorption of the state into Rome. 

The history of Syracuse is best given in the standard histories of Greece, 
especially Thirl wall, chaps, xxii, xxv, xxvi, and Grote, chaps, xliii, Ivii-lx, 
Ixxxi-lxxxv, and xcvii. Important works on its topography and antiquities 
have been written by 

Letronne, Essai critique sur la topographie de Syracuse. Paris, 1 8 1 2 ; 8vo. 
GOELLER, F,, De situ et origine Syracusarum. Lipsiae, 1818 ; 8vo. 
BoNANNi, Delle Antiche Siracuse. Palermo, 1 7 1 7 ; 2 vols, folio. 
, Leake, Notes on Syracuse, in the Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature ; 
2nd series, vol. iii. 

Cavallari, Zur topographic "von Syrakus. Gottingen, 1845 ; Svo. 

(3) Megara Hyblaa. Founded from Megara, about B..C. 726. Sent out a 
colony to Selinus, about B.C. 626, Attacked and destroyed by Gelo, B.C. 481. 
Its inhabitants transferred to Syracuse. 

(r) Gela. Founded from Rhodes and Crete, B.C. 690, Originally called 
Lindii. Sent out a Colony to Agrigentum, B.C. 582. Appears first as an 
important state about B.C. 505, when the original oHgarchy was subverted 
by Cleander, who succeeded in making himself despot, and reigned for seven 
years, from B.C. 505 to 498. He was succeeded by his brother, Hippocrates, 



PER. II. PART II.] COLONIES. l6l 

an ambitious prince, who endeavoured to make himself master of all the other 
Greek towns. He succeeded in conquering Leontini, Callipolis, Naxos, and 
Zancle, which last he made over to the Samians ; and he warred against the Syra- 
cusans with so much success that he compelled them to purchase peace by the 
cession of their colony, Camarina. His reign lasted from B.C. 498 to 491. At his 
death the supreme authority was seized by Gelo, who soon after (B.C. 485) con- 
quered Syracuse and made it his capital. Gela now declined in power. Half its 
inhabitants were removed to Syracuse, and the remainder placed under the 
government of Hiero, Gelo's brother. The subjection of Gela to Syracuse 
continued till the expulsion of Thrasybulus, B.C. 466, when it recovered its 
independence, and grew strong enough to send out a colony to Camarina. A 
prosperous time now set in. Gela remained on terms of close friendship with 
the other Dorian cities, and was unmolested by any enemy. During the 
Athenian expedition it adhered steadily to the cause of Syracuse. At length, 
in B.C. 406, misfortune fell on the Geloans : the Carthaginians in their advance 
along the southern coast besieged and took the city, and the inhabitants, quit- 
ting their home, sought a refuge at Leontini. They were restored after the 
peace of b. c. 405, but as Carthaginian subjects ; and henceforth Gela loses all its 
importance. It follows, for the most part, the fortunes of Syracuse ; but owes 
its final ruin to its own colony, Agrigentum, whose tyrant, Phintias, destroyed 
its walls and buildings, B.C. 280, and removed its inhabitants to the city which 
he founded at the mouth of the Himera. (See under ' Agrigentum.') 

{d) Camarina. This city was founded by the Syracusans, B.C. 601. About 
fifty years after the date of its foundation, it made an attempt to shake off the 
Syracusan yoke, but failing, was completely destroyed by the parent city. 
Some time after this, about B.C. 495, the site was ceded by Syracuse to Hippo- 
crates of Gela, who rebuilt and repeopled the place. His successor, Gelo, 
once more destroyed the city and transferred its inhabitants to Syracuse ; after 
which the site was unoccupied till the downfall of Gelo's dynasty, B.C. 466, 
when the city received its third and final foundation at the hand of the 
Geloans. It now rose rapidly into power and importance, occupying a peculiar 
position among the Sicilian towns, since, though of Dorian origin, its jealousy 
and fear of its near neighbour, Syracuse, led it to take part with the Ionic 
cities, Naxos, Catana, and Leontini. When the Athenians first appeared in 
Sicily, B.C. 427, Camarina joined them ; but in the great expedition, B.C. 415, 
it at first held aloof and then sided with Syracuse. A fatal blow was inflicted 
on it by the great Carthaginian invasion, B.C. 405, from which it never 
recovered. Attached generally to Syracuse in the wars which followed, it 
suffered much at the hands of the Carthaginians and the Mamertines. About 
B.C. 258 it finally passed into the possession of the Romans. 

{e) Agrigentum. Agrigentum was, next to Syracuse, the most important city 
in Sicily. Founded from Gela, B.C. 582, it early surpassed its mother state, 
and about B.C. 570 to 540 attained to great power and prosperity under Phalaris, 
the first of the Sicilian tyrants. On the assassination of Phalaris it seems to 
have regained its freedom ; but in B. C. 488 it fell again under a despot, one 
Theron, the son of ^nesidemus, who was descended from the destroyer of 
Phalaris. In alliance with Gelo, who married his daughter, this prince pro- 
ceeded to make attacks on some of the Greek towns, as particularly Himera, 
which he conquered. The king of Himera, Terillus, called in the aid of 
Carthage ; and the invasion followed which Gelo and Thero repulsed by the 
victory of B.C. 480. Thero ruled mildly, and left the crown to his son, Thra- 
sydaeus, whose cruelty caused his subjects to rebel, and to expel him, with the 
aid of Hiero, after he had i-eigned less than a year, B. c. 471. Agrigentum now 
established a democracy, under which it flourished greatly for nearly sixty years. 
Magnificent public buildings were erected ; a vast trade was carried on, more 
especially with Africa and Gaul ; and the wealth and luxury of the citizens 
became provei'bial. Philosophy was cultivated, and the fame of the city was 
spread far and wide through the wisdom of Empedocles and the rhetorical 

M 



1 62 - GRECIAN STATES. [book m. 

ability of Polus. In her wars, Agrigentura generally fought on the side of 
Syracuse ; but deeming herself aggrieved by the conduct of that state in the 
contest with the Sicel chief, Ducetius, she took up arms to avenge herself, but 
was completely defeated on the Himera (b.c. 446). The ill-feeling produced 
by this Mow was probably the chief cause of her standing wholly aloof when 
her rival was threatened by Athens, B.C. 415 to 413. Eight years later the 
prosperity of Agrigentum came to an end through her capture by the Cartha- 
ginians, who plundered and destroyed the city. A second Agrigentum arose, 
but never grew into very much importance. Enlarged and strengthened by 
Timoleon, about B.C. 340, she was able for a while to resist Agathocles, but 
was defeated by him on his return from Africa, B.C. 307, and compelled to sue 
for peace. The death of Agathocles enabled her to resume ambitious projects. 
Under a tyrant, named Phintias, she extended her dominion considerably, took 
and destroyed Gela, founded Phintias on the Southern Himera, and became 
mistress of a large portion of the interior. Pyrrhus, however, on his landing, 
found her submissive; B.C. 278, and at the commencement of the first Punic 
War, B.C. 264, she admitted a Carthaginian garrison. From this time for 
above fifty years the possession of Agrigentum was disputed between Carthage 
and Rome, to the latter of whom she remained permanently subject from her 
recovery by Laevinus, B.C. 210. 

(/) Selinus. Founded from Megara Hyblsea, about B.C. 626. Had wars from 
a very early time with Egesta. Founded Heracleia Minoa before B.C. 520. 
Had fallen about this time under the sway of a tyrant, Peithagoras, who was 
put down by the Selinuntians, assisted by the ' Spartan Euryleon, one of the 
companions of Dorieus. Euryleon then seized the crown, but held it for a 
very short space ; as the Selinuntians revolted and put him to death. Accord- 
ing to Diodorus, Selinus joined the Carthaginians on their first invasion of 
Sicily, B.C. 480, and promised Hamilcar a contingent, but failed to send it. 
After the defeat of the Carthaginians and the downfall of the tyrants, SeHnus 
participated in the general Sicilian prosperity. Her quarrels, however, con- 
tinued with Egesta ; and the appeals of the Egestaeans, who were the weaker 
party, produced, first, the great Athenian expedition, B.C. 415, and then the 
Carthaginian invasion of B.C. 409. The first result of the latter was the siege 
and capture of Selinus, which thenceforth continued, with few and short 
intervals, subject to the Carthaginian authority. About B.C. 250 the Cartha- 
ginians destroyed it, and transferred its inhabitants to Lilybseum. 

{g) Naxos, the earliest of the Greek settlements in Sicily, was founded from 
Chalcis, in Euboea, B.C. 736. Its colonists were so numerous, that in six years' 
time it was able to plant a settlement at Leontini, and soon aftervi'ards one at 
Catana. Together with its daughter cities, it seems to have flourished until 
the rise of the great Geloan dynasty, when it lost its independence. Taken 
by Hippocrates, about B. c. 498, it passed under the rule of Gelo, and then of 
Hiero, the latter of whom removed its inhabitants to Leontini, and occupied 
Naxos with new settlers. It continued, however, Ionic and Chalcidian. 
Recovering independence on the fall of the dynasty of Gelo, it re-entered into 
close relations with its daughter cities; and from about B.C. 460, Naxos, 
Leontini, and Catana form an Ionic league, which is opposed to a Doric league 
under Syracuse. The preponderance of the Dorians forced the lonians to 
look out for foreign aid, and Athens was invited in B.C. 427 and assisted 
in B. c. 415. The discomfiture of the Athenians was followed by war between 
the league and Syracuse, which continued till the menacing attitude of the 
Carthaginians in B. c. 409 suspended hostilities between the Greek States. 
Naxos bore her share in resisting the invaders ; but on peace being made she 
was immediately attacked by Dionysius, who took and destroyed the town, 
and sold its inhabitants for slaves, B.C. 403. Tauromenium afterwards grew 
up near the site of Naxos, and being partly peopled by former Naxians was 
occasionally, but incorrectly, given the name. 

(^) Leontini. The history of Leontini is closely connected with that of Naxos. 



PEE. II. PAET II.] COLONIES. 163 

It was founded from Naxos, B. c. 730, and itself founded the colony of Euboea 
shortly afterwards. About B. c. 498 it fell under the sway of Hippocrates ; 
and about B. c. 476 received the Naxians and Catanians who were removed 
from their homes by Hiero. It recovered independence, B. c. 466, on the 
fall of Thrasybulus. As the nearest neighbour to Syracuse of the three 
Chalcidic cities, it had to bear the brunt of her attacks. Hence it was the 
special danger of Leontini which caused the first invitation to be given to 
Athens ; and the failure of the great Athenian expedition was followed rapidly 
by a Syracusan attack upon the city, B.C. 412, which resulted in its capture 
and annexation. Occasionally, indeed, during the troublous period — from 
B.C. 409 to 270 — it asserted and even exercised independence; but the 
periods of autonomy were brief, and for the most part it was a mere depend- 
ency on Syracuse. It became Roman at the same time as that city, B. c. 212. 
(i) Catana. Founded from Naxos. Date of the foundation uncei'tain, but 
probably earlier than B.C. 700. Charondas, about B.C. 550, gave Catana 
a code of laws. Hiero of Syracuse having conquered it, about B.C. 476, 
transferred its inhabitants to Leontini, replacing them by a body of 10,000 new 
citizens, and at the same time changing the name of the city to iEtna. 
But, at the downfall of Thrasybulus, these new citizens were expelled ; and 
the former inhabitants, returning, brought back the old name. Leagued with 
Naxos and Leontini, Catana after this maintained her independence for more 
than half a century. In B.C. 415 she admitted the Athenians, and served as 
the basis for their earlier operations against Syracuse. After Dionysius I. had 
made peace with Carthage, B. c. 405, he took Catana, sold the inhabitants into 
slavery, and gave the city to some Campanian mercenaries. After this the 
place became politically insignificant ; but its material prosperity was not 
much lessened, and it continued to be a wealthy and populous city, even 
under the Romans. 

(y ) Zancle, afterwards Messana. The fortunes of Z ancle were very peculiar. 
Originally it was a Chalcidic city, being founded from Cumae in Italy, in 
conjunction with the mother state, Chalcis, in Euboea, probably about 
B. c. 690 to 660. It early sent out a colony to Mylse, on the north coast of the 
island, and in B. c. 648 it sent another still further westward to Himera. 
In B. c. 494, desirous of filling up the gap between these two cities, Zancle 
invited over a body of Samians, who wished to emigrate in consequence 
of the suppression of the Ionian revolt. The Samians consented ; but, instead 
of carrying out the arrangement, they, at the instigation of Anaxilaiis of 
Rhegium, took violent possession of Zancle. Soon afterwards, about B.C. 485, 
that monarch attacked and expelled them, supplying their place by a body of 
Rhegines, and at the same time changing the name of the city to Messana. 
The place continued dependent on Rhegium until B.C. 461, when it shook off 
the yoke and became free. From this time till B.C. 425 the Messanians 
flourished greatly, but in that year they were compelled to surrender to 
Athens, and became involved in the troubles which Athenian ambition brought 
upon Sicily. However, the lesson thus taught them was not without its 
use ; since it induced them to preserve a strict neutrality at the time of the 
great Athenian expedition, B. c. 415 to 41 3. In the Carthaginian wars, Messana 
escaped injury till B.C. 396, when it was taken by Himilco and completely 
levelled with the ground. On the retirement of the Carthaginians, Dionysius 
restored it, and made great use of it in his wars with Rhegium. At his death 
Messana once more became free and rose in power; but in B.C. 312 it fell 
under the power of Agathocles, who treated it with extreme severity. Still 
worse calamities, however, came on it thirty years later, upon the death of the 
tyrant. His mercenary troops, chiefly Campanians, had agreed to quit Sicily, 
and were assembled at Messana, as the natural point of embarkation, when 
they suddenly turned against the inhabitants, m.assacred them, and, under the 
name of Mamertini, seized and held the city, which henceforth ceased to be 
a Greek state, about B.C. 28a. 

M Z 



1 64 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

(Ji) Himera was founded from Zancle, as above stated, in B.C. 648. In the 
early times it does not seem to have been very flourishing ; and there is 
reason to believe that in the sixth century B.C. it fell under the dominion 
of the Agrigentine tyrant, Phalaris. Early in the fifth century, however 
(about B.C. 490), we find it once more independent; and, about B.C. 490 
to 485, it acquired importance under Terillus, a native despot, connected by 
alliance and intermarriage with Anaxilaiis of Rhegium. Terillus, attacked 
by Thero of Agrigentum, invited over the Carthaginians, B.C. 480, who 
came with a vast armament, evidently intending to conquer the island. The 
discomfiture of this host by Gelo and Thero (b. c. 480), left the latter in 
undisputed possession of Himera, which he placed under his son, Thrasydseus, 
a youth of a tyrannical disposition. Quarrels between Thrasydseus and his 
subjects followed, which induced Thero to banish vast numbers of the citizens 
and to supply their place with new settlers, chiefly Dorians, who made Himera 
into a Doric city, B.C. 476. On the expulsion of Thrasydaeus, B.C. 472, with 
the help of Hiero, Himera became free, and shortly afterwards it helped the 
Syracusans to expel the tyrant Thrasybulus, B.C. 466. The exiles upon this 
returned, and such arrangements were made that the city never afterwards 
suffered from civil discord. In the Athenian war of B.C. 415 to 413 Himera 
gave a steady support to Syracuse ; but five years after its close, the second 
Carthaginian invasion dealt it a fatal blow, the city being taken and destroyed 
by Hannibal, B.C. 408, and never afterwards rebuilt. Thermae, sometimes 
called Thermae Himerenses, which grew up at a short distance from the site 
of Himera, took its place, but never attained to any importance, remaining, 
with few and brief exceptions, subject to Carthage, until it passed into the 
possession of Rome, about B.C. 249. The Romans treated it with exceptional 
favour. 

The work of Heyne, mentioned above (p. 157), is the best on the history of 
the Sicilian colonies generally. Good monographs have been written on some 
of the more important cities. Among these the following are best worthy 
of attention : — 

SlEFERT, O., Akragas und sein Gebiet. Hamburg, 1845 ; Svo. 

„ 7jancle-M.essana. 

Reinganum, Selinus und sein Gebiet. Leipsic, 1827 ; 8vo. 

On the antiquities of the island the following works may be consulted : — 

Serra DI Falco, Antichita della Sicilia. Palermo, 1834-39; 5 vols, folio. 

BiSCARl, Fiaggio per le antichita della Sicilia. Palermo, 1 8 1 7 ; 8vo. 

ToRREMUZZA, Sicilia urbium, populorum, regum quoque et tyrannorum numis- 
mata. Palermo, 1 7 8 1 ; folio. 

Castello, G. L., Sicilice et objacentium insularum 'veterum inscriptionum no'va 
collectio. Palermo, 1769; folio. Also 

Keerl, J. H., Siciliens 'vorziigUchste Munzen und Steins chrif ten aus dem 
Alterthume. Gotha, 1802. 

iv. Colonies on the Coasts of Gaul and Spain. By far the most important 
of these was Massilia (Marseilles), on the coast of Gaul, a colony of the 
Phocaeans. It was probably founded about B.C. 600, when the coast was 
still in the occupation of the Ligurians. The relations of the colony with 
the natives were generally amicable ; but we have an account of one attempt 
to surprise and destroy it, which terminated in failure. Massilia had a small 
territory, but one fertile in corn and wine. Her trade was large, and was 
carried on both by sea and land. Her merchants visited the interior of Gaul, 
and even obtained tin and lead by this overland route from the Scilly Islands. 
She extended her colonies eastward and westward along the coast of Gaul, 
and even planted some in Spain. The best known of these settlements were 
Olbia (near Hyeres), Antipolis (now Antibes), Nicaea (Nice), and Monoecus 
(Monaco). These all lay to the east. To the west were Agatha, Rhoda, 
Emporiae, Hemeroscopeium, and Maenaca, the last named not far from Malaga. 



PEB. II. PART II.] COLONIES. 165 

A special jealousy existed between Massilia and Carthage, which led often 
to hostilities ; but the victory always remained with the little Greek state. 
More dangerous was the enmity of the Ligurians and Gauls, whose near 
neighbourhood caused the Massiliots constant alarm. However, with the 
aid of the Romans, to whom Massilia allied herself as early as B.C. 218, these 
foes were kept in check, and Massilia preserved her freedom until the time of 
the Roman Civil Wars. Having then sided with Pompey, she was stormed 
by Caesar, B.C. 49. Even after this she retained a nominal independence, 
being reckoned a 'foederata civitas' as late as the time of PHny. The con- 
stitution of Massilia was an oligarchy. A council of six hundred members 
{yHj.ovxoi), how appointed we know not, but who held office for life, possessed 
the monopoly of political power. These deputed the administration to a 
committee of fifteen, of whom three were presidents. 

Numerous works have been written on the history and constitution of 
Massilia ; but they are not of very much value. The best are — 

JOHANSEN, J. C, Veteris MassilicR res et instituta. Kiel, 18 18. 
Brvckhkr, A., Historia ReipubliccB Massiliensium. Gottingen, 1826; 8vo. 

v. Colonies on the Coast of Africa. The African colonies, like those on 
the coast of Gaul and Spain, all issued from one source. This was Cyrene, 
fovmded by adventurers from Thera, at the instigation of the Delphic oracle, 
about B.C. 631. Cyrene was at first governed by kings, viz. : 1. Battus I, the 
founder. Reigned forty years, from B.C. 631 to 591. Succeeded by his son, 
2. Arcesilaiis I, who reigned sixteen years, from B.C. 591 to 575. Thus far 
Cyrene was tranquil, but not particularly prosperous. 3. Battus II, surnamed 
' the Happy,' succeeded. In his reign the Delphic oracle induced the stream 
of Greek colonisation to set steadily towards Africa ; and Cyrene grew rapidly 
in population and importance. Fresh territory was occupied ; and when the 
native tribes, robbed of their lands, called the Egyptians to their aid, Apries, 
the Egyptian monarch, was repulsed, and his army almost wholly destroyed, 
about B.C. 570. Battus II was succeeded by his son, 4. Arcesilaiis II, who 
had dissensions with his brothers, which led to the founding of Barca, whither 
they betook themselves. The Libyans of the neighbourhood preferring to 
attach themselves to Barca, Arcesilaiis attacked them, but suffered a severe 
defeat. Upon this he fell sick, and was murdered by his brother Learchus ; 
who was in his turn put to death by Eryxo, the widow of Arcesilaiis, about 
B.C. 540. 5. Battus III, surnamed 'the Lame,' inherited the crown from his 
father. Under him the troubles of the state increased; and, appeal being 
made to Delphi, Demonax of Mantinea was called in to arrange affairs. He 
confined the royal authority within very narrow limits, and made a fresh 
division of the citizens into tribes upon an ethnic basis, about B.C. 538. 
6. Arcesilaiis III, the son of Battus the Lame, succeeded, about B.C. 530. 
Submitted to the Persians, B.C. 525. Claimed all the privileges of the early 
kings, and in the struggle that followed was forced to fly. Collected troops 
in Samos and effected his return ; but, using his power cruelly, was murdered 
by his subjects at Barca. 7. Battus IV, his son, became king ; but Pheretima, 
grandmother of this Battus, was, as it would seem, for some time regent, Battus 
being (it is probable) a minor. Flight of Pheretima to Egypt and expedition 
of Aryandes, about B.C. 514. Barca taken. Pheretima soon afterwards dies. 
Battus reigned till about B.C. 470, when he was succeeded by his son, 
8. Arcesilaiis IV, who distinguished himself by his Pythian victories, and 
reigned probably till about B.C. 430. On his death, his son, another Battus, 
was expelled, and sought a refuge at the Cyrensean colony of Euesperides. 
A democratic republic was now established, which seems, however, to have 
worked but ill. Violent party contests, from time to time, shook the state ; 
and it fell more than once under the sway of tyrants. Still, in many respects, 
Cyrene continued to flourish. Its trade, particularly in the celebrated silphium, 



1 66 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

remained great ; its architecture was handsome ; its sculpture far from con- 
temptible ; it took an important part in the favourite pursuit of the Greeks, 
philosophy, as the Cyrenaic School, founded by the Gyrensean Aristippus, and 
the New Academy, founded by another Gyrensean, Garneades, sufficiently 
shew. Moreover, it contributed to Greek literature the poetry of Galli- 
machus, and, in Ghristian times, the rhetoric of Synesius. It is uncertain 
when the dependence of Gyrene on Persia ceased ; but it can scarcely have 
continued later than the revolt of Egypt under Nepherites, B.C. 405. In 
B.C. 332, the Cyrenseans submitted to Alexander; and the whole of the 
Gyrenaica became thenceforth a dependency of Egypt, faUing successively to 
the Ptolemies and the Romans. 

The chief settlements in the Gyrenaica, besides Gyrene, were 1. Barca. 
Founded, about B.C. 554, by seceders from Gyrene in conjunction with 
native Libyans. Hence the city had always a semi-African character. Sub- 
mitted to Gambyses, B.C. 525. Destroyed by Pheretima, aided by Aryandes, 
about B.C. 514, in revenge for the murder of her son. The inhabitants 
removed to Bactria. The new Barca, which grew up after this, was always 
an insignificant place. 2. Euesperides, or Hesperides. Founded by Arcesi- 
laiis IV, about B.C. 450. Only important in the time of the Ptolemies, when 
it became Berenice. 3. Tauchira, or Teuchira. Probably founded by Barca. 
Belonged, at any rate, to the Barcaeans. Became Arsinoe under the Ptolemies. 
4. Apollonia, the port of Gyrene. This city, with the four previously men- 
tioned, constituted the Gyrenaic ' Pentapolis.' , 

On the history of Gyrene the student may consult with advantage the 
works of 

Hardion, J., Histoire de la ville de Cyrene, in the Memoir es de V Academic des 
Inscriptions, vol. iii. And 

Thrice, J. P., Bjes Cyrenensium a primordiis inde civitatis, &c. Hafniae, 
1828; 8vo. 

Ample light has been thrown on the topography and antiquities by modern 
travellers. The best works are — 

Della Gella, Viaggio da Tripoli di Barbaria alle Frontieri Occidentali dell' 
Egitto. Genoa, 1819. 

Beechey, Expedition to Explore the North Coast of Africa. London, 1828 ; 
4to. 

Pacho, F. R., Relation d^un Voyage dans la Marmarique, la Cyrenaiqice, Sec. 
Paris, 1827 ; 4 to. 

Hamilton, J., Wanderings in North Africa. London, 1856 ; 8vo. 

Barth, Wanderungen durch das Punische und Kyrena'ische KUstenland. Berlin, 
1849; 8vo. And the same writer's Travels in North and Central Africa. 
London, 1857-58; 5 vols. 8vo. 

The settlement of Naucratis in Egypt was not, properly speaking, a Greek 
colony; but some mention of it may fitly be made here. Its position 
resembled that of Ganton before the first Ghinese war, or of Nagasaki and 
Jeddo at the present day. It was not relinquished to the Greeks, but was 
simply the place, and the only place, in Egypt where they were allowed 
to settle. A large Greek population was settled there after the time of 
Amasis, B.C. 569 to 525, composed chiefly of emigrants from the coasts and 
islands of Western Asia. The town boasted four Greek temples ; and the 
Greeks had the free exercise of their religion, the appointment of their own 
magistrates, and the power of exacting customs and harbour-dues. The 
Naucratites manufactured porcelain and wreaths of flowers (artificial ?). The 
place continued to flourish until the Alexandrine era, when it declined as 
Alexandria rose into greatness. 



PER. III.] SOURCES OF THE LATER HISTORY. 167 



THIRD PERIOD. 

From the Comviencement of the Wars with Persia, B.C. 500, to the 
Battle 0/ Cheer 077 eia, B.C. 338. 

Sources. For the first portion of this period, from B.C. 500 to 479, 
Herodotus (books v. to ix.) is our chief authority ; but he may be supple- 
mented to a considerable extent from Plutarch {Fit. Themist. and Aristid.') 
and Nepos (Fit. Miltiad., Themist., Aristid., and Pausan.'). For the second 
portion of the period, from B.C. 479 to 431, the outline of Thucydides (book 
i. chaps. 24 to 146) is of primary importance, especially for the chronology; but 
the details must be filled in from DiODORUS (book xi. and first half of book 
xii.), and, as before, from Plutarch and Nepos. (The latter has one ' Life ' 
only bearing on this period, that of Cimon; the former has two, those of 
Cimon and Pericles.) For most of the third portion of the period, the time 
of the Peloponnesian War — B.C. 431 to 404— we have the invaluable work 
of Thucydides (books ii. to viii.) as our single and sufficient guide; but^ 
where the work of Thucydides breaks off, we must supplement his con- 
tinuator, Xenophon {Hellenica, books i. and ii.), by DiODORUS (last half 
of book xii.). For the fourth portion of the period, from the close of the 
Peloponnesian War to the battle of Mantineia— B.C. 404 to 362 — Xenophon 
in his Hellenica, his Anabasis, and his Agesilaus, is our main authority : he is to 
be compared with Diodorus (books xiii. to xv.), Nepos {Fit. Lysand., Conon., 
Pelop., Epaminond., and Agesi), and Plutarch (Fit. Pelop., Artaxerxis, d.ndAges.'). 
For the remainder of the histoi-y — from B.C. 362 to 338 — in default of 
contemporary writers, we are thrown primarily on the sixteenth book of 
Diodorus ; but perhaps more real knowledge of the period is to be derived 
from the speeches of the orators, especially those of Demosthenes and 
^SCHINES. The lives of Phocion, and Demosthenes in Plutarch, and those 
of Iphicrates, Chabrias, Timotheus, and Datames in Nepos, further illustrate 
the period, which also receives some light from Justin, Pausanias, and a 
few other authors. 

The most important modern works on the entire period from B.C. 500 to 
338 are those to which reference has been already made under the ' Sources' 
for the ' First' and ' Second Period.' (See pp. 118 and 124.) But the following 
may be mentioned as specially illustrative of the ' Third Period' : — 

Barthelemy, Foyage dujeiine Anacharsis en Grece. Paris, 1788 ; 4 vols. 4to. 
This work is one which will never become antiquated, combining, as it does, 
vast learning with remarkable refinement and good taste. 

Becker, W. A., Charikles, Bilder altgriechische Sitte. Leipsic ; 3 vols. 8vo. 
Translated into English by the Rev. F. Metcalfe. London, 1845 ; 8vo. 

BuLWER, Sir E. L., Athens, its Rise and Fall; <with Fie<ws of the Literature, 
Philosophy, and Social Life of the Athenian People. London, 1837; 2 vols. 
8vo. 

Magnificent works on the monuments of Greece, architectural and other, 
which belong chiefly to this period, have been published in the present 
century. Among these the following are the most remarkable : — 

Stuart and Revett, The Antiquities of Athens Measured and Delineated, 
London, 1762-1816; 4 vols, folio. The 2nd Edition was published in 
1825-27. 

Cockerell, Sir C, Temples of Mgina and Bass ce. (See p. 143.) 

Wordsworth, Christopher, Greece; Pictorial, Descriptive, and Historical. 
London, 1852; large 8vo. 

Choiseul-Gouffier, Voyage pittoresque de la Grece. Paris, 1782-1822 ; 
2 vols, folio. 



1 68 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

1. The tendency of the Greek States, in spite of their separatist 

leanings, towards consolidation and union round one or more 

centres, has been already noticed. (See p. I2cj.) Up 

Tendency of , ' . , _ . -^ ^^^ „ ^ ^ ^ ' ^ 

the great to the date of the Persian War, Sparta was the state 

Persian War to ^vhich exercised the greatest centralising; force, and 

consolidate ° 03 

the Greek gave the most promise of uniting under its leadership 
na ion. ^^ scattered members of the Hellenic body. Events 
prior to the Persian War had been gradually leading up to the 
recognition of a Spartan headship. It required, however, the 
actual occurrence of the war to bring rapidly to maturity what 
hitherto had only existed in embryo — to place at once vividly 
before the whole race the consciousness of Hellenic unity, to 
drive Sparta to the assumption of leadership, and to induce the 
other Greek states to acquiesce calmly in the new position 
occupied by one of their number. 

2. The beneficial influence of an extreme common danger was 
not limited to the time of its actual existence. The tendency 

^ 1 towards consolidation, having once obtained a 

General recog- ' " 

nition of certain amount of strength, did not disappear with 
egemonies. ^^^ cause which brought it into being. From the 
time of the Persian invasion, we notice a general inclination of 
the Greeks to gather themselves together into confederations 
under leaders. The chief states, Sparta, Athens, Boeotia, Argos, 
are recognised as possible holders of such a hegemony; and the 
history from this time thus possesses a character of unity for 
which we look in vain at an earlier period. 

Immediate causes which led to the First Persian War. 1. Flight of 
Hippias to Sardis, and influence which he exercised over Artaphernes. 
2. Revolt of the lonians, and share taken by Athens and Eretria in the 
burning of Sardis, B.C. 500. (See above, p. 136,) 3. Treatment of the 
heralds of Darius by Athens and Sparta, B.C. 491. These causes, however, 
at the most hastened an attempt, which would in any case have been made, 
to extend the Persian dominion over continental Greece. 

3. The first expedition of Mardonius having been frustrated, 
in part by a storm, in part by the opposition of the Bryges, 

Expeditions of ^ tribe of Thraciatis, it was resolved, before a 
Mardonius, and second expedition was sent out, to send heralds and 

of Datis— Battle , ^ , ,, 

of Marathon, summon the Greek states severally to surrender. 

B.C. 490. -j-j^g result of this policy was striking. The island 

states generally, and many of the continental ones, made their 

submission. Few, comparatively, rejected the overture. Athens 



FEB. III.] FIRST PERSIAN WAR. 169 

and Sparta, however, marked their abhorrence of the proposal 
made them in the strongest possible way. In spite of the uni- 
versally-received law, that the persons of heralds were sacred, they 
put the envoys of Darius to death, and thus placed themselves 
beyond all possibility of further parley with the enemy. 

The submission of ^gina to Persia at this time is made a subject of 
complaint by Athens at Sparta. Punishment of Mgmz by Cleomenes in 
consequence, and deposition of Demaratus, who attempts to thwart the 
expedition. 

Expedition of Datis and Artaphernes, B.C. 490. Occupation of Naxos. 
Capture of Eretria. Battle of Marathon, and failure of a subsequent attempt 
to surprise Athens. Tardy arrival of the Spartan succours. Unhappy end of 
Miltiades. 

4. The victory of Marathon gave Greece a breathing-space before 
the decisive trial of strength between herself and Persia, which 
was manifestly impending. No one conceived „ ^ 

J i: ^ Great augment- 

that the danger was past, or that the Great King ation of the 

would patiently accept his defeat, without seek- ^*^^"'^^ "^^• 

ing to avenge it. The ten years which intervened between 

Marathon and Thermopylae were years of preparation as much 

to Greece as to Persia. Athens especially, under the wise 

guidance of Themistocles, made herself ready for the coming 

conflict by the application of her great pecuniary resources 

to the increase of her navy, and by the training of her people 

in nautical habits. The war between this state and ^gina, 

which continued till B.C. 481, was very advantageous to the 

Grecian cause, by stimulating these naval efforts, and enabling 

Themistocles to persuade his countrymen to their good. 

Influence of Themistocles at this time secured by the ostracism of his rival, 
Aristides, B.C. 482, probably. 

5. The military preparations of Darius in the years b.c. 489 to 
487, and those of Xerxes in b.c. 484 to 481, must have been well 
known to the Greeks, who could not doubt the 

quarter in which it was intended to strike a blow, gj-ggg ^^^^.s at 
Accordingly, we find the year b.c. 481 given up to the Isthmus, 
counter-preparations. A general congress held at 
the Isthmus — a new feature in Greek history — arranged, or 
suppressed, the internal quarrels of the states attending it^ 
assigned the command of the confederate forces, both by land 
and sea, to Sparta; and made an attempt to obtain assistance 
from distant, or reluctant, members of the Hellenic body — 



170 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

Argos, Crete, Corcyra, and Sicily. A resolution was at the 
same time taken to meet the invader at the extreme northern 
boundary of Greece^ where it was thought that the pass of 
Tempe offered a favourable position for resistance. 

5. The force sent to Thessaly, finding the pass of Tempe 

untenable^ withdraws at once; and the position of Thermopylae 

and Artemisium is chosen for the combined re- 

oTxerxe^^" sistance to the foe by sea and land. Though that 

B. c. 480. position is forced, Attica overrun, and Athens 

Battles of Ther- ^ . , , '. ,• X ^. 

mopylre, Sala- taken and burnt, in revenge for Sardis, yet the 
™'!'X^^*^^' defeat of his vast fleet at Salamis (b.c. 480) alarms 

and Mycale. ^ t y 

Xerxes, and causes him to retire with all his 
remaining vessels and the greater part of his troops. Mardonius 
stays behind with 350,000 picked men; and the fate of Greece 
has to be determined by a land battle. This is fought the next 
year, B.C. 479, at Plataea, by the Spartan king, Pausanias, and the 
Athenian general, Aristides, who with 69,000 men completely 
defeat the Persian general, take his camp, and destroy his army. 
A battle at Mycale (in Asia Minor), on the same day, effects the 
destruction of the remnant of the Persian fleet; and thus the 
entire invading armament, both naval and military, is swept 
away, the attempt at conquest having issued in utter failure. 

Details of the "War. The Greeks evacuate Thessaly early in the year. 
Fresh deliberation at the Isthmus, and resolve to occupy Thermopylae and 
Artemisium. Nine thousand men under Leonidas take post at Thermopylae, 
and 271 vessels under Eurybiades guard the strait at Artemisium. Advance 
of Xerxes to Malis. Fruitless assaults on the Greek position during two days. 
Way of turning the position made known to the Persians by Ephialtes. 
Leonidas dismisses half his army. Gallant struggle of the remainder ter- 
minates in the complete destruction of all, except 400 Thebans, who are made 
prisoners. About the same time engagements take place between the Persian 
fleet of above 1,000 vessels, and the very inferior Greek fleet at Artemisium, 
without any decisive advantage to either side ; but the forcing of Thermopylae 
by the Persian army induces Eurybiades to retire down the Euripus and bring 
his fleet to an anchor at Salamis. March of Xerxes through Phocis and 
Boeotia into Attica. Failure of attempt on Delphi. Burning of Athens. 
General alarm of the Greeks, and inclination of the fleet to disperse. Politic 
measures of Themistocles prevent the dispersal, and bring on a general 
engagement of the two fleets in the strait between Attica and Salamis, in 
which the Greeks with 380 sail completely vanquish and disperse the Persian 
fleet of 1,207 triremes. Terror of Xerxes — his retreat. Mardonius winters 
in Thessaly, and in the summer of B.C. 479 resumes the offensive with 
300,000 picked Asiatic troops and 50,000 confederate Greeks. Negotiations 
follow between Persia and Argos. Persian troops re-occupy Attica and enter 
the Megarid. Long inaction of Sparta. Death of Cleombrotus and accession 
of Pausanias followed by a sudden change of policy. The full force of 
Sparta is levied; large contingents are demanded and obtained from the 



PER. III.] SECOND PERSIAN WAR. i^i 

allies; and the Greeks take the field with above 100,000 men. Mardonius 
retires into Boeotia. The Greeks cross Cithseron and take up a position near 
Platasa. Manoeuvres of Mardonius. He at length attacks the Greeks as 
they are executing a difficult movement, so that they have to engage with 
two-fifths of their army absent. Battle of Platgea. Complete rout of the 
Persians — only Artabazus with a body of 40,000 retreats in good order. 
Double disaster at Mycale a fit termination of the first act of the great 
historic drama. 

7. The discomfiture "of the assailing force which had threatened 
the liberties of Greece, while it was far from bringing the war to 
an end, entirely changed its character. Greece now q., p 1^ 
took the offensive. Not content with driving her assume 
foe beyond her borders, she aimed at pressing Persia '^'^^ '^^^^^q^' 
back from the advanced position which she had 

occupied in this quarter, regarding it as menacing to her own 
security. At the same time, she punished severely the Grecian 
states which had invited or encouraged the invader. Moreover, 
she vindicated to herself, as the natural consequence of the 
victories of Salamis and Mycale, the complete command of the 
Levant, or Eastern Mediterranean, and the sovereignty over all 
the littoral islands, including Cyprus. 

Operations after Myeale. Siege and capture of Sestos, B.C. 479. 
Expedition of Pausanias to Cyprus, and liberation of the island from the 
Persian yoke, B.C. 478. Siege of Byzantium, also conducted by Pausanias. 
Byzantium taken. Siege and capture of Eion, B.C. 477. Attempts on Doriscus. 

8. The new position into which Greece had been brought by 
the course of events, a position requiring activity, enterprise, the 
constant employment of considerable forces at a 

distance from home, and the occupation of the abdicates the 
^gean with a powerful navy, led naturally to the ^b^c^477'' 
great change which now took place in Grecian 
arrangements — the withdrawal of Sparta from the conduct of the 
Persian War, and the substitution of Athens as leader. No 
doubt Sparta did not see at once all which this change involved. 
The misconduct of Pausanias, who entered into treasonable 
negotiations with Xerxes, and the want of elasticity in her 
system, which unfitted her for distant foreign wars, made Sparta 
glad to retire from an unpleasant duty, the burden of which she 
threw upon Athens, without suspecting the profit and advantage 
which that ambitious state would derive from undertaking it. 
She did not suppose that she was thereby yielding up her claim 
to the headship of all Greece at home, or erecting Athens into 



172 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

a rival. She imagined that she could shift on to a subordinate 
responsibilities which were too much for her, without changing 
the attitude of that subordinate towards herself. This was a fatal 
mistake, so far as her own interests were concerned^ and had to 
be redeemed at a vast cost during a war which lasted, with short 
interruptions, for the space of more than fifty years. 

9. On Athens the change made by the transference of the 
leadership had an effect, which, if not really advantageous in all 
respects, seemed at any rate for a time to be ex 

theoommand traordinarily beneficial. Her patriotic exertions 

by Athens during the War of Invasion appeared to have re- 
ment of ceived thereby their due reward. She had obtained 

the Athenian ^ fj-gg ^QViX for her Superabundant activity, energy, 
and enterprise. She was to be at the head of a 
league of the naval powers of Greece, offensive and defensive, 
against Persia. The original idea of the league was that of a free 
confederation. Delos was appointed as its centre. There the 
Congress was to sit, and there was to be the common treasury. 
But Athens soon converted her acknowledged headship {rjyeixovla) 
into a sovereignty {apxri)' First, the right of states to secede from 
the confederacy, which was left undecided by the terms of con- 
federation, was denied ; and, upon its assertion, was decided in 
the negative by the unanswerable argument of force. Next, the 
treasury was transferred from Delos to Athens, and the meetings 
of the Congress were discontinued. Finally, the separate treasury 
of the league was merged in that of Athens ; the money and ships 
of the allies were employed for her own aggrandisement in what- 
ever way Athens pleased • and the various members of the league, 
excepting a few of the more powerful, were treated as Athenian 
subjects, compelled to model their governments in accordance 
with Athenian views, and even forced to allow all important 
causes to be transferred by appeal from their own local courts 
to those of the Imperial City. These changes, while they im- 
mensely increased the wealth and the apparent importance and 
power of Athens, did nevertheless, by arousing a deep and general 
feeling of discontent among her subject-allies, introduce an 
element of internal weakness into her system, which, when the 
time of trial came, was sure to show itself and to issue in disaster, 
if not in ruin. 



PER. III.] ATHENIAN EMPIRE. 173 

10. Internal changes of considerable importance accompanied 
this exaltation of Athens to the headship of an Empire. The 
power of the Clisthenic strat^gi increased, while that 

/-I 11 1 11- 1 -i-i Internal 

of the old archons declined until it became a mere changes in 
shadow. The democracy advanced. By a law of ^^ Athenian 

J J Constitution. 

Aristides, b.c. 478, the last vestige of a property Brilliant period 
qualification was swept away, and every Athenian ° ^"^' 
citizen was made eligible to every oflBce. The law-courts were 
remodelled and systematised by Pericles^ who also introduced the 
plan of paying the poorer citizens for their attendance. The old 
Council of the Areopagus was assailed^ its political power de- 
stroyed, and its functions made simply judicial. At the same time, 
however, certain conservative alterations were introduced by way 
of balance. The establishment of the Nomophylaces and the 
Nomothetse, together with the institution of the Indictment for 
Illegality {ypacprj irapavoixcov), had a decided tendency to check the 
over-rapid progress of change. The practice of re-electing year 
after year a favourite strategus gave to the republic something 
of the stability of monarchy, and rendered fluctuations in policy 
less frequent than they would otherwise have been, and less 
extreme. Meanwhile^ the convenient institution of ostracism 
diminished the violence of party struggles, and preserved the state 
from all attempts upon its liberties. The sixty years which 
followed Salamis form, on the whole, the most brilliant period of 
Athenian history, and exhibit to us the exceptional spectacle 
of a full-blown democracy, which has nevertheless all the 
steadiness, the firmness, and the prudent self-control of a limited 
monarchy or other mixed government. 

11. Athens also during this period became the most splendid 
of Greek cities, and was the general resort of all who excelled 
in literature or in the arts. The Parthenon, the ^ 

Ornamentation 

Theseium, the temple of Victory, the Propylaea were of the city. 
built, and adorned with the paintings of Polygnotus chirfTeaf^of 
and the exquisite sculptures of Phidias and his literature and 
school. Cimon and Pericles vied with each other 
in the beautifying of the city of their birth ; and the encourage- 
ment which the latter especially gave to talent of every kind, 
collected to Athens a galaxy of intellectual lights such as is 
almost without parallel in the history of mankind. At the same 



lU GRECIAN STATUS. [book iii. 

time, works of utility were not neglected, but advanced at an 
equal pace with those whose character was ornamental. The 
defences of Athens were rebuilt immediately after the departure 
of the Persians, and not long afterwards the fortifications were 
extended to the sea on either side by the ^ Long Walls' to the two 
ports of Pirseus and Phalerum. The triple harbour of Piraeus was 
artificially enlarged and strengthened. New docks were made, 
and a town was laid out on a grand plan for the maritime popula- 
tion. A magnificent force of triremes was kept up, maintained 
always at the highest point of efficiency. Colonies were moreover 
sent out to distant shores, and new towns arose, at Amphipolis, 
Thurii, and elsewhere, which reproduced in remote and barbarous 
regions the splendour and taste of the mother city, on a reduced 
scale. 

13. Although Aristides was the chief under whom Athens 
obtained her leadership, and Themistocles the statesman to whom 

c r she owed it that she was thought of for such a 

Sticcesses of ° 

Cimon, b. c. position, yet the guidance of the state on her new 
475-463. career was intrusted to neither the one nor the 
other, but to Cimon. Aristides appears to have been regarded 
as deficient in military talent; and the dishonest conduct of 
Themistocles had rendered him justly open to suspicion. It was 
thus to the son of the victor at Marathon that the further 
humiliation of Persia was now committed. 

Campaigns of Cimon: — Siege and capture of Eion, about B.C. 475. 
Occupation of Scyros, B. c. 470. Expedition to Asia, and victories of Cimon 
at the Eurymedon, B.C. 466. War with Thasos, B.C. 465, and attempt to 
found Amphipolis. Thasos reduced, B. c. 463. Contingent sent to aid the 
Spartans against their revolted Helots. Contingent dismissed, B.C. 461. 
Anger of the Athenians on this account. 

13. The revolt of the Spartan Helots simultaneously with the 

siege of Thasos, B.C. 464, was an event the importance of which 

Revolt of the can Scarcely be over-estimated. It led to the first 

Helots, actual rupture of friendly relations between Athens 

Cimon ostra- and Sparta ; and it occupied the attention of Sparta 

1.?PerickiTo* ^° completely for ten years that she could do 

power. nothing during that time to check the rapid advance 

which Athens made, so soon as she found herself free to take 

whatever part she pleased in Grecian politics. It likewise caused 

the banishment of Cimon (b.c. 461) and the elevation of Pericles 



PEE. III.] POLICY OF PERICLES. 175 

to the chief direction of affairs — a change of no small moment, 
being the substitution of a consummate statesman as chief of the 
state for a mere moderately skilful general. 

14. The ambition of Pericles aimed at securing to Athens the 
first position in Greece both by land and sea. He understood that 
Sparta would not tolerate such pretensions, and was ^jj^g 
prepared to contest with that power the supremacy of Pericles. 
on shore. But he believed that ultimately, in such a country as 
Greece, the command of the sea would carry with it a predominant 
power over the land also. He did not design to withdraw Athens 
from her position of leader against Persia j but^ treating the 
Persian War as a secondary and subordinate affair^ he wished to 
direct the main energies of his country towards the acquisition 
of such authority and influence in central and northern Greece as 
would place her on a par with Sparta as a land power. At the 
same time, he sought to strengthen himself by alliances with such 
states of the Peloponnese as were jealous of Sparta ; and he was 
willing^ when danger threatened, to relinquish the contest with 
Persia altogether, and to devote all his efforts to the establishment 
of the supremacy of Athens over Greece. 

Military History of Athens vmder Pericles, from B.C. 461 to 
B.C. 447. Alliance made with Argos and Thessaly, B.C. 461. The Megarid 
annexed, and its capital connected by 'Long Walls' with the sea. First 
Peloponnesian War, under the leadership of Corinth, B. c. 460 to 457. Double 
defeat of the Corinthians on the land, and victory gained by Athens over the 
iEginetans and their allies by sea. Siege of ^gina. Fleet of 200 vessels, 
despatched to Cypi'us against the Persians, proceeds to Egypt to assist Inarus. 
The Athenian ' Long Walls ' are begun. Effort made by Sparta to check her 
rival brings on the battle of Tanagra, B.C. 457, a Spartan victory, but one 
which left the field completely open to Athens. The victory of Myronidas 
at Q^nophyta, sixty-two days after Tanagra (b. c. 456), lays Boeotia prostrate at 
her feet. Phocis and Opuntian Locris submit to her. ^gina surrenders and 
joins the Athenian confederacy. Recall of Cimon, and completion of the 
'Long Walls.' Triumphant cruise of Tolmidas round the Peloponnese, 
B.C. 455. Athenian expedition into Thessaly in the same year fails. Disasters 
overtake the ships sent to Egypt. Pericles in person makes an unsuccessful 
attempt on CEniadse, B.C. 454. Warned by these continued disasters, and 
distrustful of the condition of Boeotia, Pericles, three years later, concludes 
a peace with Sparta for five years, B. c. 451. This enables him once more to 
despatch a force against Persia, which is placed under the command of Cimon, 
who dies at the siege of Citium. The fleet, however, shortly afterwards gains 
a great victory off Salamis. Hereupon peace is made. Athens relinquishes 
to Persia Cyprus and Egypt, while Persia permits the independence of the 
Greek cities in Asia Minor, B.C. 450. A short pause occurs, and then the 
fabric of Athenian land empire is shattered by the rebellion of Boeotia and the 
defeat of Coroneia, B.C. 447, which involve the further immediate loss of 
Phocis and Locris, while they threaten still worse consequences. 



176 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

15. The culminating period of Athenian greatness was the in- 
terval between CEnophyta and Coroneia, B.C. 456 to 447. Pericles, 

who at the outset appeared likely to succeed in all 
Athens reaches ^'- ■' 

the height that he had planned^ learned gradually by the 
and beeinsTo ^ourse of events that he had overrated his country's 
decline, powers, and wisely acquiesced in the inevitable. 
From about b.c. 454 his aim was to consolidate and 
conserve, not to enlarge, the dominion of Athens. But the 
policy of moderation came too late. Boeotia, Phocis, and Locris 
burned to be free, and determined to try the chance of arms, 
so soon as a convenient occasion offered. Coroneia came, and 
Athens was struck down upon her knees. Two years later, on 
the expiration of the five years' peace (b.c. 445), Sparta arranged 
a combination which threatened her rival with actual destruction. 
Megara on the one side and Euboea on the other were stirred 
to revolt, while a Peloponnesian force under Pleistoanax and 
Cleandridas invaded Attica at Eleusis. But the crisis was met 
by Pericles with firmness and wisdom. The Spartan leaders were 
accessible to bribes, and the expenditure of a few talents relieved 
Athens from her greatest danger. Euboea, the possession of which 
was of vital consequence to the unproductive Attica, received 
a severe punishment for her disaffection at the hands of Pericles 
himself. Megara, and a few outlying remnants of the land empire 
enjoyed from B.C. 456 to 447, were made the price of peace. By 
the cession of what it would have been impossible to retain, Athens 
purchased for herself a long term of rest, during which she might 
hope to recruit her strength and prepare herself to make another 
struggle for the supremacy. 

Thirty years' peace concluded, B.C. 445. Authority of Pericles at its height. 
Ostracism of Thucydides, son of Melesias, B.C. 443. Great works of Pericles 
executed. Power of Athens nursed by extension of cleruch system (e. g. Hestiaea 
and Sinop^), and by the judicious planting of colonies (e.g. Thurii, B.C. 443, 
and Amphipolis, B.C. 437). Good economy of Pericles, and flourishing 
condition of the treasury. The only interruption of peace during the thirteen 
years from B.C. 445 to 432 is caused by the defection of Samos, B.C. 440, 
which the Athenians provoke by interference in the local politics. Revolt put 
down, after a nine months' siege, by Pericles. 

Commencement of differences between Corinth and Corcyra on account 
of Epidamnus, B.C. 436. Naval victory of the Corcyrseans, B.C. 435. Great 
preparations of Corinth, and application of Corcyra to Athens, B.C. 433. 
Corcyra taken into alliance and effectually protected, B.C. 432. 

In revenge, Corinth induces Potidaea to revolt from Athens, B.C. 432. 
Other Chalcidian cities join. Corinth assists the revolters. Perdiccas 
faithful to neither side. Athenians lay siege to Potidaea. Corinth appeals to 
Sparta, and, after fruitless negotiations, war is declared, b. c. 431. 



PEE. III.] PELOPONNESIAN WAR. 177 

16. The struggle which now commenced is known by the name of 
the 'Peloponnesian War.' It lasted twenty-seven years^ from b.c. 431 
to 404, and extended itself over almost the whole of The Pelo- 
the Grecian world, involving almost every state from War'TT 
Selinus at the extreme west of Sicily to Cnidus and 431-404. 
Rhodes in the ^gean. Though in the main a war for supremacy 
between the two great powers of Greece, Athens and Sparta, it 
was also to a certain extent ^ a struggle of principles,' and likewise, 
though to a lesser extent, ' a war of races.' Speaking generally, the 
Ionian Greeks were banded together on the one side, and made 
common cause with the Athenians ; while the Dorian Greeks, with 
a few remarkable exceptions, gave their aid to the Spartans. But 
political sympathy determined, to a greater degree than race, the 
side to which each state should attach itself. Athens and Sparta 
were respectively in the eyes of the Greeks the representatives of 
the two principles of democracy and oligarchy j and it was felt 
that, according as the one or the other preponderated, the cause 
of oligarchical or democratical government was in the ascendant. 
The principle of non-intervention was unknown. Both powers 
alike were propagandist; and revolutionised, as occasion oflFered, 
the constitutions of their dependencies. Even without interven- 
tion, party spirit was constantly at work, and the triumph of 
a faction over its rival in this or that petty state might at 
any time disturb the balance of power between the two chief 
belligerents. 

17. These two belligerents offered a remarkable contrast to 
each other in many respects. Athens was predominantly a mari- 
time, Sparta a land power. Athens had influence Contrast 
chiefly on the eastern side of Greece and in Asia; thTtwcTchirf 
Sparta, on the western side of Greece, and in Italy belligerents. 
and Sicily. Again, the position of Sparta with respect to her 
allies was very different from that of Athens. Sparta was at the 
head of a purely voluntary confederacy, the members of which 
regarded their interests as bound up in hers, and accepted her, on 
account of her superior military strength, as their natural leader. 
Athens was mistress of an empire which she had acquired, to a 
considerable extent, by force ; and was disliked by most of her 
subject-allies, who accepted her leadership, not from choice, but 
from compulsion. Thus Sparta was able to present herself before 
men's minds in the character of ' liberator of Greece ;' though, had 

N 



178 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

she obtained a complete ascendancy over the rest of Greece, her 
yoke would probably have been found at least as galling as the 
Athenian. 

Allies of Sparta. The allies on whom Sparta could count were the Corin- 
thians, the Boeotians, the Megarians, the Phocians, the Locrians, the Ambra- 
ciots, the Leucadians, the Anactorians, the Arcadians, the Eleans, the Sicyonians, 
and the Achseans of Pellene. In iEtolia the semi-barbarous inhabitants were 
inclined to be favourable to them ; and in Italy and Sicily the Dorian cities 
were their well-wishers, and might be expected, under certain circumstances, to 
lend them aid. 

Subject- Allies of Athens. These were Euboea, Chios, Lesbos, Samos, the 
Cyclades and Sporades (except Melos and Thera, which were neutral), mari- 
time Caria, all the Greek cities in Asia Minor and on the coast of Thrace, 
Platsa, Naupactus, Zacynthus, and Corcyra. The Thessalians and Acarnanians 
were friendly to them, and so were the Ionian cities in Sicily and Italy. 
Besides her allies, Athens held at this time, as parts of her own territory, 
Hestiaea, ^gina, Scyros, Lemnos, Imbrus, and the Chersonese. 

18. Among the principal advantages which Athens possessed 
over Sparta at the commencement of the war was the better 

Finances of arrangement of her finance. Sparta can scarcely be 
Athens. gg^j^j ^q h^ve had a revenue at all. Her military 
expenses were met by extraordinary contributions, which she and 
her allies levied upon themselves, as occasion seemed to require. 
Athens, on the contrary, had an organised system, which secured 
her an annual revenue greatly exceeding her needs in time of peace, 
and sufficient to support the whole expense of a moderate war. 
When extraordinary efforts were required, she could fall back on 
her accumulations. Which were large- or she could augment her 
income by requiring from her citizens an increased rate of 
property-tax. 

Finances of Athens, (i) Sources of her Re'venue. 1. The tribute paid by 
the subject-allies, which was originally fixed, by the rating of Aristides, at 460 
talents (about 110,000/.) annually, but had been raised, by the substitution of 
money for ships, from that sum to 600 talents (145,000/.) 2. The fieToUiov, 
or direct tax paid by foreign residents. 3. The income derived from the 
public property of the state, especially from the mines, which about this time 
were very productive. 4. The customs — a 2 per cent, ad -valorem duty on 
all exports and imports. 5. Harbour-dues — i per cent, on the value of all 
cargoes brought into Athenian ports. 6. A duty on slaves, paid by their 
masters. 7. A tax on emancipated slaves, paid by themselves. 8. The ela(f)opd 
or property-tax--a resource on which the state could fall back, but which was 
not used in ordinary years. The entire revenue from all these sources put 
together has been estimated at 1,000, and again at 2,000 talents, i.e. at a 
quarter or half a million of our money. To complete the notion of the means 
of the state, we must add to these various sources of revenue the liturgies, 
which threw on individuals the duty of providing for various expenses that 
must otherwise have been defrayed by the state, (ii) Heads of Expenditure. 
1. The support of the navy, including building of ships and pay of men, was 
probably the largest head. 2. Next to this might come the expenditure on 



PER. III.] PELOPONNESIAN WAR. 179 

shows and sights {to BeapiKov^. 3. The pay of soldiers in actual service would 
be a third head. 4. The dicasts', and at a later date the ecclesiasts' fees would 
also be an important item. 5. In most years some money would be spent on 
public buildings. 6. Votes were likewise often passed for the reward of indi- 
viduals, which must in some years have amounted to a large sum. 7. Finally, 
there was a kind of ' secret service money,' which, though not large, was 
remarkable. 

Athens began the war with an accumulation of coin to the amount of 6,000 
talents (nearly 1,500,000/.) in her treasury. She had likewise in her temples 
deposits and offerings of great value. The single statue of Athene, in the 
Parthenon, is said to have had gold ornaments worth more than 125,000/. 

19. The Peloponnesian War may be divided into three periods: — 
1st. From the commencement until the conclusion of the Peace 
of Nicias — ten years — B.C. 431 to 431. and. From 
the Peace of Nicias to its formal rupture by Sparta periods of 
— eight years — B.C. 421 to 413. 3rd. From the * ^ ^^' 
rupture of the Peace of Nicias to the capture of Athens — 
rather more than nine years — B.C. 413 to 404. 

30. First Period. The struggle was conducted for two years and 
a half by Pericles ; then by Nicias, but under the check of a strong 
opposition led by Cleon. Athens was continually more p-^.^^ period 
and more successful up to b.c. 434, when the fortune b.c. 

1 ■ '^ 431-4:21 

of war changed. The rash expedition into Boeotia in 
that year lost Athens the flower of her troops at Delium ; while 
the genius of the young Spartan, Brasidas^ first saved Megara^ and 
then, transferring the war into Thrace, threatened to deprive the 
Athenians of the entire mass of their allies in this quarter. The 
effort made to recover Amphipolis (e.g. 422) having failed, and 
Athens fearing greatly the further spread of disaffection among 
her subject-cities, peace was made on terms disadvantageous but not 
dishonourable to Athens — the general principle of the peace being 
the statu quo ante helium^ but certain exceptions being made with 
regard to Platsea and the Thracian towns, which placed Athens in 
a worse position than that which she held when the war began. 

Details of the "War. B.C. 431. Attack on Platsea by Thebans. Invasion 
of Attica by Archidamus. Athenian fleet ravages the Peloponnesian coast, and 
brings over Cephallenia. First appearance of Brasidas, who saves Methone, 
Athenians in full force ravage the Megarid. AUiance made by Athens with 
Sitalces, king of Thrace. — B.C. 430. Second invasion of Attica by Archidamus. 
Appearance of the plague. Athenian fleet, under Pericles, ravages Epidaurus 
and Troezen. Plague carried to Potidsea. Spartans attempt to make alliance 
with Persia. Potidsea recovered. — B.C. 429. Spartans, under Archidamus, 
blockade Plataea, and under Cnemus attempt to reduce Acarnania. Failure of 
Cnemus, and naval victories of Phormio. Death of Pericles. Expedition 
of Sitalces. — B.C. 428. Third invasion of Attica, under Archidamus. Revolt 

N 3 



i8o GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

of Mytilene. Athenian fleet ravages the Peloponnese. — B.C. 427. Fourth 
invasion of Attica, under Gleomenes. Reduction and punishment of Mytilene. 
Surrender of Platsea. Attempt of Peloponnesians to recover Corcyra by aid 
of the oligarchical party leads to a bloody revolution in that island. First 
Athenian expedition to Sicily. — B.C. 426. Earthquakes prevent the usual 
invasion of Attica. Failure of Nicias to take Melos. Unsuccessful expedition 
of Demosthenes into ^tolia. Foundation of Heracleia in Trachis by the 
Spartans. Defeat of Eurylochus at Olpse by Demosthenes. — B.C. 425. Fifth 
invasion of Attica, under Agis. Occupation of Pylos, and blockade of Sphac- 
teria. Attempt of Sparta to make peace frustrated by Cleon. Sphacteria 
captured by Cleon and Demosthenes. The Messenians settled at Pylos. 
Nicias, in command of the fleet, first attacks Corinth, but is beaten olf, and 
then occupies Methana in Epidauria. Fresh troubles in Corcyra. Anactorium 
taken. Chios suspected. — B.C. 424. Attica not invaded. Athenians under 
Nicias occupy Cythera, and take and burn Thyrea. Attempt to recover 
Megara fails, but results in capture of Nisaea. Disasters begin. The Greek 
cities in Sicily come to terms, and require the Athenians to quit the island. 
An invasion of Bceotia from two quarters completely fails, and the Athenians 
are signally defeated at Delium, Brasidas marches through Thessaly into 
Chalcidice, and is received as a liberator by Acanthus, Argilus, Amphipolis, 
and other cities. — B.C. 423. A truce made for a year. Brasidas continues to 
receive into alliance such of the Chalcidic cities as revolt to him. His expe- 
dition, in conjunction with Perdiccas, against the Illyrians. Nicias recovers 
Mende, besieges Scione, and makes alliance with Perdiccas. — B.C. 422. Cleon, 
appointed to the command in Thrace, takes Torone and Galepsus, and tries 
to recover Amphipolis, but is completely defeated by Brasidas, who, however, 
as well as Cleon, is slain in the battle. Hereupon peace is made, chiefly by the 
efforts of Nicias. 

'X\. Second Period. The continuance of hostilities during this 

period, while there was peace, and even for some time alliance, 

, . , between the two chief belligerents, was attributable, 

becond period, o j j 

B. c. at first, to the hatred which Corinth bore to Athens, 

^Rise^of ^"^^ ^° '^^ energy which she showed in forming 

Alcibiades to coalitions against her detested rival. Afterwards it 

P°^^^- was owing also in part to the ambition and influence 

of Alcibiades, who desired a renewal of the war, hoping thereby 

to obtain a sphere suitable to his talents. Argos, during this 

period, rose for a time into consideration, her alliance being 

sought on all hands j but the battle of Mantinea, by destroying 

the flower of her troops^ once more broke her power, and her final 

gravitation to the Athenian side was of no consequence. 

Details of the History. B.C. 421. Alliance, offensive and defensive, 
between Athens and Sparta. Defensive alliance between Argos, Corinth, 
Mantinea, Elis, and Chalcidice. AUiance, offensive and defensive, between 
Sparta and Boeotia. — B.C. 420. Athens, offended hereat, makes alliance with 
Argos. Mantinea and Elis join this league. Sparta is rejoined by most 
of her old allies. — B.C. 419. Expedition of Alcibiades into the Peloponnese. 
War between Argos and Epidaurus. — B.C. 418. Sparta takes the field against 
Argos. Battle of Mantinea. Argos submits and joins the Peloponnesian 
league, but repents the next year, B.C. 417, and makes alliance with Athens. — 
B.C. 416, Athenian expedition against Melos. 



PEK. III.] PELOPONNESIAN WAR. i8i 

22. Far more important than his Peloponnesian schemes was the 
''project, which Alcibiades now brought forward, of conquering Sicily. 

The success of this attempt would have completely . 

destroyed the balance of power in Greece, and have of conquering 
made Athens irresistible. The project, though perhaps ^^^ ^' 

somewhat over-bold, would probably have succeeded, had the task 
of carrying it through to the end been intrusted to the genius 
which conceived it. Unfortunately for Athens, she was forced to 
choose between endangering her liberties by maintaining Alci- 
biades in power and risking the failure of an expedition to which 
she was too far committed for her to be able to recede. The 
recall of Alcibiades was injurious to Athens in various ways. It 
deprived her of her best general, and of the only statesman she 
possessed who was competent to deal with all the peculiar difficulties 
of the expedition. It made Sparta fully acquainted with the 
Athenian schemes for the management of Sicilian affairs, and so 
enabled her to counteract them. Finally, it transferred to the 
enemy the most keen and subtle intellect of the time, an intellect 
almost certain to secure success to the side which it espoused. 
Still, if the choice lay (as probably it did) between accepting Alci- 
biades as tyrant and driving him into exile, we must hold Athens 
justified in the course which she took. There might easily be a 
rapid recovery from the effects of a disastrous expedition. Who 
could predict the time at which the state would recover from the loss 
of those liberties on which her prosperity had recently depended ? 

Sicilian Expedition, b. c. 415. First fleet and army sent out under 
the command of Nicias, Lamachus, and Alcibiades. Armament numbers 
134 triremes, 5,100 hoplites, and 1,300 light-armed. Obtains possession of 
Naxos and Catana. Recall of Alcibiades, who escapes to Sparta. Desultory 
operations of Nicias. — B.C. 414. Siege of Syracuse commences. Death of 
Lamachus. Arrival of Gylippus. 

23. Third Period. The maintenance of the ' Peace of Nicias ' 
had long been rather nominal than real. Athens and Sparta had 
indeed abstained hitherto from direct attacks upon 

each other's territories; but they had been con- Third period, 
tinually employed in plots against each other's 413-404. 
interests, and they had met in conflict both in the ^he Sicilian 
Peloponnese and in Sicily. Now at length, after expedition, 
eight years, the worn-out fiction of a pretended 
amity was discarded; and the Spartans, by the advice of Alci- 
biades, not only once more invaded Attica, but made a permanent 



i82 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

settlement at Deceleia within sight of Athens. The main theatre 
of the struggle continued, however, to be Sicily ; where the Athe- 
nians clung with desperation to a scheme which prudence required 
them to relinquish, and lavishly sent fleet after fleet and army 
after army to maintain a conflict which was hopeless. Still the 
expedition might have re-embarked, without suffering any irre- 
parable disaster, had it not been for an improvement in ship- 
building, devised by the Corinthians and eagerly adopted by the 
Syracusans, which deprived Athens of her command of the sea, 
and forced her armies to surrender at discretion. Thus the fatal 
blow, from which Athens never recovered, was struck by the 
hatred of Corinth, which, in the course of a few weeks, more 
than avenged the injuries of half a century. 

Conclusion of the War in Sicily. Athens sends out a fresh armament 
under Demosthenes and Eurymedon. Night attack on the Syracusan works 
fails. Naval battles in the harbour of Syracuse result in defeat of Athens. 
Siege raised. Attempt of Nicias and Demosthenes to reach the south coast 
fails. Surrender of the two armies. Cruel treatment of the prisoners, 
B.C. 413. 

24. The immediate result of the disasters in Sicily was the 
transference of the war to Asia Minor. Her great losses in ships 

and sailors had so crippled the naval power of 

the War to Athens, that her command of the sea was gone ; 

Asia Minor, i]^q more SO, as her adversaries were strengthened 
B.C. 412. , ' ^ 

by the accession to their fleet of a powerful 

Sicilian contingent. The knowledge of this entire change in 
the relative position of the two belligerents at sea, encouraged 
the subject-allies generally to shake off the Athenian yoke. 
Sparta saw the importance of encouraging this defection; and 
crossing the ^Egean Sea in force, made the theatre of war Asia 
Minor, the islands, and the Hellespont. Here, for the first 
time, she was able to make the Persian alliance, which she 
had so long sought, of use to her. Persian gold enabled her to 
maintain a fleet equal or superior to that of Athens, and ulti- 
mately gave her the victory in the long doubtful contest. 

25. What most surprises us, in the third and last period of the 
war, is the vigour of the Athenian defence; the elasticity of 

Wonderful ^pi^i^j ^^^ ^i^^rgy, and the fertility of resource 

vigour of which seemed for a time to have completely 

surmounted the Sicilian calamity, and made the 

final issue once more appear to be doubtful. This wonderful 



PER. III.] PHLOPONNESIAN WAR. 183 

recovery of strength and power was, no doubt, in a great measure 
due to the genius of one man — Alcibiades. But something 
must be attributed to the temper and character of the people. 
Athens, like Rome, is greatest and most admirable in misfortune; 
it is then that her courage, her patience, and her patriotism 
deserve and command our sympathies. 

Details of the "War till the Disgrace of Alcibiades. B.C. 412. Revolt 
of Chios, Miletus, and other Ionian cities. Arrangements between Sparta and 
Tissaphernes. Samos preserved to Athens by a bloody revolution. Battle of 
Miletus. Naval victory of Astyochus. Cnidus and Rhodes revolt from 
Athens. — B.C. 411. War languishes. Finesse of Tissaphernes. Revolt of 
Abydos, Chalcedon, and Byzantium. Mindarus succeeds Astyochus, and 
transfers the war to the Hellespont, where he is supported by Pharnabazus. 
Recall of Alcibiades. Naval victory of Sestus gained by Thrasybulus. At 
home, the Athenians lose Euboea. — B.C. 410. Great victory of Cyzicus gained 
by Alcibiades. Spartans make proposals of peace, which are rejected. — B.C. 409. 
Defeat of Thrasyllus, near Ephesus. Victory of Abydos. At home, loss of 
Nisasa and Pylos. — B.C. 408, Alcibiades recovers Chalcedon and Byzantium. 
Returns to Athens and is received with favour (b.c. 407) ; but, on the loss of 
the battle of Notium by his lieutenant in his absence, is disgraced, and goes 
into exile. 

35. The arrival of the younger Cyrus in Asia Minor was of 
great advantage to Sparta, and must be regarded as mainly 
effective in bringing the war rapidly to a sue- Arrival of the 
cessful issue. Hitherto the satraps had pursued the younger Cyras 
policy which the interests of Persia required, had victory to 
trimmed the balance^ and contrived that neither Sparta. 
side should obtain a decided preponderance over the other. But 
Cyrus had personal views, which such a course would not have 
subserved. He required the assistance of Greek troops and 
ships in the great enterprise that he was meditating; and, to 
obtain such aid, it was necessary for him to make a real friend of 
one belligerent or the other. He chose Sparta, as best suited to 
furnish him the aid he required ; and, having made his choice, he 
threw himself into the cause with all the energy of his nature. 
It was his prompt and lavish generosity which prevented the 
victory of Arginusse from being of any real service to Athens, 
and enabled Lysander to undo its effects and regain the mastery 
of the sea, within the space of thirteen months, by the crowning 
victory of ^gos-potami. That victory may also have been in 
another way the result of Lysander's command of Persian gold ; 
for it is a reasonable suspicion that some of the Athenian com- 
manders were bribed, and that the negligence which lost the 
battle had been paid for out of the stores of Cyrus. 



1 84 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

Closing Years of the "War. Conon succeeds Alcibiades in the command, 
B.C. 406. Naval victory of Callicratidas. Conon is shut up in Mytilene. 
Great efforts made to release him. Fresh armament sent out, and victory 
of the Athenians at Arginusse. Condemnation of the Generals for neglect 
of the men on board the disabled ships. Lysander sent as commander by 
Sparta, B.C. 405. At first, declines an engagement. Proceeds to the 
Hellespont. Takes Lampsacus. Destroys the Athenian fleet at jEgos- 
potami, except the squadron of Conon. Blockades Athens by sea, while 
Pausanias and Agis invest it by land. The city surrenders after a five 
months' siege — April, B.C. 404, The long walls and the defences of the 
Peirseus are destroyed ; all ships of war except twelve are given up ; Athens 
places herself under the leadership of Sparta, and the city is handed over to 
an oligarchy of Thirty men. 

37. The internal history of Athens during the third period of 
the Peloponnesian War is full of interest. The disastrous termi- 
nation of the Sicilian expedition threw discredit upon 
of Athens democratical institutions ; and immediately after 
during this ^he news of it reached Athens, the constitution was 

period. 

modified in an aristocratic direction, b.c. 412. The 
change, however, then made was not regarded as sufficient ; and 
in B.C. 411a more complete revolution was effected. Cowed by a 
terrorism which the political clubs knew well how to exercise, the 
Athenian democracy submitted to see itself abolished in a per- 
fectly legal manner. A nominated Council of 400 succeeded to 
the elective ^ovX^ ; and a pretended committee of 5,000 took the 
place of the time-honoured kKKkt](ria. This government, which 
was practically that of three or four individuals, lasted for about 
four months, when it, was overthrown by violence, and the 
democracy was restored again under certain restrictions. 

a8. The triumph of Sparta was the triumph throughout Greece 
of oligarchical principles. At Athens the democracy was abo- 

Triumph of lished, and the entire control of the government 
Sparta. placed in the hands of a Board of Thirty, a Board 

Oppressiveness 

of her which has acquired in history the ominous name of 
leadership, c the Thirty Tyrants.' Boards of Ten {beKapxiai), 
chosen by himself, were set up by Lysander as the supreme 
authority in Samos and in other cities, while Spartan ' harmosts,' 
with indefinite powers, were established everywhere. The Greeks 
found that, instead of gaining by the change of masters, they had 
lost ; they had exchanged the yoke of a power, which^ if rapacious, 
was at any rate refined, civilized, and polished, for that of one 
which added to rapacity a coarse arrogance and a cruel harshness 
which were infinitely exasperating and offensive. Even in the 



PEE. III.] MARCH OF THE TEN THOUSAND. 185 

matter of the tribute there was no relaxation. Sparta found that, 
to maintain an empire, she must have a revenue; and the con- 
tributions of her subject-allies were assessed at the annual rate of 
1,000 talents (243,000/.). 

Time of the Thirty Tyrants at Athens. Reign of Terror. Internal 
quarrels, and execution of Theramenes. Thrasybulus and the exiles seize 
Phyle ; advance and occupy the Peiraeus. Defeat and death of Critias. 
Interference of Lysander and Pausanias. Accommodation made with Sparta — 
deposition of the oligarchy, and return of the exiles. Restoration of the 
democracy as it stood before the capture of Athens, B.C. 403. 

The condition of Athens under the Thirty may be regarded as a sample of 
what happened generally in the Greek cities which the fortune of war had 
placed at the mercy of Sparta. 

29. The expedition of the Ten Thousand, B.C. 401 to 400, 
belongs less to the history of Greece than to that of Persia (see 
above, p. 10 1) ; but it had some important con- Expedition of 
sequences on the after course of Greek policy, the Ten Thou- 

,_, , r -n ■ 1 -J u -x. ^^^^- Effects 

J he weakness or rersia was laid bare ; it was on Greek and 
seen that her capital might be reached, and that Persian pohcy. 
Greek troops might march in security from end to end of the 
Empire. Hitherto even the attacks of the Greeks on Persian 
territory had been in a measure defensive^ having for their object 
the security of European Hellas, or the liberation of the Greek 
cities in Asia. Henceforth ideas of actual conquest floated 
before the Grecian mind ; and the more restless spirits looked to 
this quarter as the best field for their ambition. On the side of 
the Persians, alarm at the possible results of Greek audacity 
began to be felt, and a new policy was developed in consequence. 
The Court of Susa henceforth took an active part in the Greek 
struggles, allying itself continually with one side or the other, 
and employing the treasures of the state in defraying the cost of 
Greek armaments, or in corrupting Greek statesmen. Finally, 
Persia came to be viewed as the ultimate arbiter of the Greek 
quarrels ; and rescripts of the Great King at once imposed peace 
on the belligerents, and defined the terms on which it should be 
concluded. 

30. The immediate consequence of the Cyreian expedition was 
war between Persia and Sparta. Sparta was known to have 
lent her aid to Cyrus ; and Tissaphernes had orders. War of the 
on his return to the coast, to retaliate by severities p^^rsk^B^c. 
on the Greek cities, which were now under the 399-394. 
protection of the Spartans. The challenge thus thrown down 



1 86 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

was readily accepted; and for six years — B.C. 399 to 394— 
Sparta carried on war in Asia Minor^ first under generals of 
no great talent, but^ finally, under Agesilaiis, who succeeded in 
making the Great King tremble for his empire. The consequences 
would probably have been serious, if Persia had not succeeded in 
effecting a combination against the Spartans in Greece itself, 
which forced them to recall Agesilaiis from Asia. 

Attack of Tissaphernes on the Greek cities, B.C. 400, Command of 
Thimbron, and reinforcement of his army by the returned Ten Thousand, 
B.C. 399. Thimbron superseded by Dercyllidas — his successful campaigns. 
Agesilaiis crosses into Asia, B.C. 396, and takes the command. Victory of the 
Pactolus, B.C. 395. Agesilaiis invades Phrygia and Paphlagonia. His recall, 
B.C. 394. 

31. Instigated by the Persians, and jealous of the power of 

Sparta, Argos, Thebes, Corinth, and Athens formed an alliance 

. , . against her in the year b.c. 395. A war of a 

War, B.C. chequered character followed. Sparta lost the com- 

na^ed by™he i^^nd of the sea by the great victory of Conon at 

' Peace of Cnidus, but maintained her superiority on land in 

Antalcidas ' l j 

the battles of Corinth, Coronaea, and Lechaeum. 
Still she found the strain upon her resources so great^ and the 
difficulty of resisting the confederation, supported as it was by the 
gold and the ships of Persia, so extreme, that after a few years she 
felt it necessary to procure peace at any cost. It was at her 
instance, and by her energetic exertions^ that Persia was induced 
to come forward in the new character of arbitress, and to require 
the acceptance by the Greeks generally of the terms contained in 
the ' Peace of Antalcidas' (see above, p. loi) — terms disgraceful to 
the Greeks, but advantageous to Sparta, as the clause establishing 
the independence of all the Greek states (TrdAets) injured Corinth 
and Thebes, while it left her own power untouched. 

The Spartans invade Boeotia, and are defeated at Haliartus, B.C. 395. 
Lysander falls. Agesilaiis is recalled from Asia. Victory of Conon at Cnidus 
soon after his departure, B.C. 394. Battles of Corinth and Coronaea in the 
same year. Battle of Lechaeum, B.C. 393. Conon and Pharnabazus with 
a Persian fleet ravage the Peloponnese and take Cythera. Long Walls of 
Athens restored. Revolutions at Corinth, B.C. 392, followed by a union with 
Argos. Successes of Iphicrates. Expeditions of Agesilaiis into Acarnania, 
B.C. 391, and of Agesipolis into Argohs, B.C. 390. Athenians assist the 
Cypriot rebel, Evagoras. Death of Thrasybulus. Teleutias plunders Piraeus, 
B.C. 388. Acceptance of the 'Peace of Antalcidas,' B.C. 387. 

33. The immediate consequences of the * Peace of Antalcidas' 



PER. III.] CORINTHIAN WAR. 187 

were the separation of Corinth from Argos, and the deposition of 
Thebes from her hegemony over the Boeotian cities. ^.'S&zi of this 
The re-establishment of Plataea followed, a judicious 'Peace.' 
measure on the part of Sparta, tending to produce estrangement 
between Thebes and Athens. Sparta was now at the zenith of 
her power. Claiming the right of seeing to the execution of the 
treaty which she had negotiated, she extended her influence on all 
sides^ nowhere meeting with resistance. But the intoxication of 
success had its usual effect in developing selfishness and arrogance 
— fatal defects in a ruling state, always stirring up sentiments of 
hostility, which sooner or later produce the downfall of the power 
that provokes them. The domineering insolence 
which dictated to Mantineia and Phlius, might in- Mantineia and 
deed, if confined to those cities, or others like them, PHius by 

' ' ' Sparta. 

have had no ill results ; but when, in time of peace, 
the citadel of Thebes was occupied, and the act, if not commanded, 
was at least approved and adopted by Sparta, the bitter enmity of 
one of the most powerful states of Greece was aroused, „ . , ^, 

'- ^ ^ Seizure oi the 

and every other state was made to feel that, in its Cadmeia, 
turn, it might by some similar deed be deprived of 
independence. But the aggressor was for the time triumphant; 
and having no open enemy now within the limits of Greece 
Proper, sought one on the borders of Thrace and Macedon, where, 
under the headship of Olynthus, a powerful confederacy was 
growing up, consisting in part of Greek, in part of Macedonian, 
cities. A war of four years, B.C. 383 to 379, sufficed 
to crush this rising power, and thus to remove from oiynthus, 
Northern Greece the only rival which Macedon had "•^• 

382-379 

seriously to fear — the only state which, by its 
situation, its material resources, and its numerical strength, 
might have offered a considerable obstacle to the advance of the 
Macedonian kings to empire. 

'^'3^. Thus far success had attended every enterprise of Sparta, 
however cruel or wicked ; but at length the day of Thebes re- 
retribution came. Pelopidas and his friends effected covers her m- 
■^ dependence. 

a bloody revolution at Thebes, recovered the Cad- -^^^ ^^ Sparta 
meia, expelling the Spartan garrison, and set about against 
the restoration of the old Boeotian league. Athens, Athens, 
injured and insulted, declared war against her old b.c. 379-373. 
rival, made alliance with Thebes, revived her old confederacy 



1 88 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

on fair and equitable terms^ and recovered the empire of the seas by 
Peace made ^^ victories of Naxos and Leucas. All the efforts of 
with Athens. Sparta against her two antagonists failed, and after 
seven years of unsuccessful war, she was reduced to make a second 
appeal to Persia, who once more dictated the terms on which peace 
was to be made. Athens, now grown jealous of Thebes, was content 
to sign, and her confederates followed her lead ; but Thebes by 
the mouth of Epaminondas declined, unless she were recognised 
as Head of Boeotia. As Sparta positively refused to admit this 
claim, Thebes was publicly and formally excluded from the Treaty 
of Peace. 

Pelopidas and his brother exiles enter Thebes, murder the polemarchs, and 
induce the Spartan garrison to capitulate, B.C. 379. Expedition of Cleom- 
brotus into Boeotia, and attempt of Sphodrias on the Piraeus, B.C. 378. Acquittal 
of Sphodrias at Sparta causes Athens to declare war. Revival of the Athenian 
confederacy, but as a voluntary union, and with no fixed rate of tribute. New 
arrangement of the Athenian property-tax. Two expeditions of Agesilaiis 
against Thebes, B.C. 378 and 377. Attempt of C;:ieombrotus, B.C. 376. Sparta 
tries to re-assert her command of the sea, but is defeated by Ghabrias near 
Naxos, B.C. 376, and by Timotheus off the peninsula of Leucas, B.C. 375. 
Victory of Pelopidas at Tegyra, B.C. 374, and recovery of all Boeotia by 
Thebes, except Orchomenus. Boeotian confederacy re-organised. Thebes 
attacks Phocis. Attempt of Sparta to take Corcyra fails, B.C. 373. Third 
embassy of Antalcidas to the court of Susa, and conclusion of peace at Sparta 
between all the belligerents except Thebes, B.C. 372. 

Rise of Jason of Pherae to power about this time. Application of Poly- 
damas the PharsaHan to Sparta rejected, B.C. 374. Dionysius I of Syracuse 
aids the Lacedaemonians, B.C. 373. 

34. Sparta now, having only Thebes to contend with, imagined 
that her triumph was secure, and sent her troops into Boeotia under 
War of Sparta Cleombrotus, hoping to crush and destroy Thebes, 
against gu^ the magnificent victory of Epaminondas at 
Battle of Leuctra — the fruit at once of extraordinary strategic 
B c STi^and ^^^^^ ^^ '^^ time, and of an excellent training of his 
its conse- soldiers previously — dashed all these hopes to the 
ground. Sparta fell, suddenly and for ever, from her 
high estate. Almost all Central Greece joined Thebes. Arcadia 
rose and began to organise itself as a federation. The Lacedae- 
monian harmosts were expelled from all the cities, and the philo- 
Laconian party was everywhere put down. Epaminondas, more- 
over, as soon as the murder of Jason of Pherse left him free to act, 
redoubled his blows. Entering the Peloponnese, he ravaged the 
whole Spartan territory at will, and even threatened the city; 
which Agesilaiis with some difficulty preserved. But these tem- 
porary losses and disgraces were as nothing compared with the 



PER. III.] HEGEMONY OF THEBES. 189 

permanent injuries which the prudent policy of the Theban 
leader inflicted on his foe, in the constitution of the Arcadian 
league and foundation of Megalopolis ; and, still more, in the re- 
establishment of an independent Messenia and the building of 
Messene. Henceforth Sparta was a second-rate rather than a 
first-rate power. She ceased to exercise a hegemony, and was terri- 
torially not much larger than Arcadia or Argos. 

Invasion of Cleombrotus and battle of Leuctra, B.C. 371. Appearance on 
the scene of Jason of Pherse, by whose advice the defeated army is allowed to 
retire. Great increase of Theban power alarms Athens. Assassination of 
Jason of Pherse (b.c. 370) relieves Thebes from all apprehension of danger to 
her dominion at home. Invited by Arcadia, Epaminondas marches into the 
Peloponnese. Ravages Laconia and attacks Sparta itself. Founds Megalopolis as 
the centre of an Arcadian confederation. Builds Messene, and re-constitutes 
Messenia as a state. Winters in Arcadia, and threatens a second attack on 
Sparta. 

0^^. In her distress, Sparta makes appeal to Athens for aid ; and 
an alliance is formed between these two powers on terms of 
equality, which is joined after a time by Achsea, Elis, Alliance of 
and even by most of Arcadia, where a jealousy of '^^gpartr^*^'^ 
Theban power and interference is gradually deve- b. c. 369. 
loped. Thebes, partly by mismanagement, partly by the mere 
circumstance of her being now the leading state, arouses hostility, 
and loses ground in the Peloponnese, which she endeavours to 
recover by obtaining and exhibiting a Persian rescript, declaring 
her the head of Greece, and requiring the other states to submit 
to her under pain of the Great King's displeasui-e. But missives of 
this character have now lost their force. The rescript is generally 
rejected j and the power of Thebes in the Peloponnese continues to 
decline. 

36. Meanwhile, however, she was extending her influence in 
Northern Greece, and even beyond its borders. Her armies were 
sent into Thessaly, where they contended with Alexander of 
Pheras, the brother of Jason, and, after some reverses, xhessal 
succeeded in reducing him to dependence. All made subject 
Thessaly, together with Magnesia and Achasa Phthio- 
tis, were thus brought under her sway. In Macedonia, she arbi- 
trated between the diflFerent claimants of the throne, and took 
hostages, among whom was the young prince Philip. Her fleet 
about the same time proceeded to the coast of Asia. 

First expedition of Pelopidas against Alexander of Pherse, B.C. 369. Alliance 
made with Alexander of Macedon. — Second expedition, B.C. 368. Pelopidas 
proceeds on into Macedonia, and receives hostages. — Third expedition, 



I90 GRECIAN STATES. [book iii. 

B.C. 366. Pelopidas seized by Alexander of Pherse and cast into prison. First 
army sent to release him defeated. Second successful, under Epaminondas. — 
Fourth expedition, B.C. 363. Pelopidas slain. — Expedition of Malcitas and 
Diogeiton the same year. Alexander submits. Thessaly reduced. 

37. But the honour of Thebes required that her influence should 
be re-established in the Peloponnese, and her friends there released 

Thebes once ffom a situation which had become one of danger. 

more invades Accordingly, in b.c. '3^62^ Epaminondas once more 

Peloponnese. took the field, and entering the Peloponnese, was 

Mantineia within a little of surprising Sparta. Disappointed, 

B.C. 362. however, of this prey by the activity of Agesilaiis, 

and of Mantineia by the sudden arrival of an Athenian contingent, 

he brought matters to a decision by a pitched battle j in which, 

repeating the tactics of Leuctra, he once more completely defeated 

the Spartans and their allies, dying, however, in the arms of victory, 

B.C. 362. His death almost compensated Sparta for her defeat, 

since he left no worthy successor, and Thebes, which he and his 

friend Pelopidas had raised to greatness, sank back at once to a 

level with several other powers. 

38. The result of the struggle which Sparta had provoked by 
her seizure of the Theban citadel was the general exhaustion of 

„ , . j^ Greece. No state was left with any decided pre- 
produced by dominance. The loss of all in men and money 
e s mgg e. ^^^ great j and the battle of Mantineia deprived 
Greece of her ablest general. If profit was derived by any state 
from the war, it was by Athens, who recovered her maritime 
superiority (since the attempt of Epaminondas to establish a 
rival navy proved a failure), re-constituted her old confederacy, 
and even, by the occupation of Samos and the Chersonese, began 
to restore her empire. In Macedonia her influence to some 
extent balanced that of Thebes. 

39. The general exhaustion naturally led to a peace, which was 
made on the principle of leaving things as they were. The indepen- 
dence of Mess^ne and the unification of Arcadia were 

Peace made, expressly recognised, while the headship of Thebes 
from which ^coA Athens over their respective confederacies was 

Sparta alone ^ 

excludes her- tacitly sanctioned. Sparta alone declined to sign the 

^^ ■ terms, since she would on no account forego her right 

to re-conquer Messenia. She had no intention, however, of making 

any immediate appeal to arms, and allowed her king, Agesilaiis, to 

quit Sparta and take service under the native monarch of Egypt. 



PEB. III.] SOCIAL WAR. 19 1 

Death of Agesilaiis on his march from Egypt to Gyrene, B.C. 361. His per- 
sonal character stands, perhaps, as high as that of Epaminondas ; but in military 
genius he was decidedly inferior to his Theban adversary, 

40. The peace of b.c. -t^Sq:, was not disturbed on the continent 
of Greece till after the lapse of six years. Meanwhile, however, 
hostilities continued at sea between Alexander of Athens 
Pherae and Athens, and, in the continental dis- successful in 

, 1 , 1 • ■ r ^ -n 1 J several petty 

tncts beyond the limits or Cjreece rroper, between ^vais, b. c. 
Athens on the one hand, and Amphipolis, Perdiccas 362-358. 
of Macedon, and the Thracian princes, Cotys and his son Cerso- 
bleptes, on the other. Athens was intent on recovering her old 
dominion in these parts, while the Macedonian and Thracian 
kings were naturally jealous of her growing power. Nothing, how- 
ever, as yet showed that any important consequences would arise 
out of these petty struggles. Macedonia was still one of the 
weakest of the states which bordered on Greece ; and even when, 
on the death of Perdiccas, b.c. 359, his brother^ Philip, who had 
escaped from Thebes, mounted the throne, it was impossible for 
the most sagacious intellect to foresee danger to Greece from this 
quarter. 

41. The year b.c. 358 was the culminating point of the second 
period of Athenian prosperity. Athens had once more made her- 
self mistress of the Chersonese : she had recovered ^^ ■ ^ ^ht 

' Social War, 

Euboea, which had recently attached itself to Thebes : b. c. 

and she had obtained from Philip the acknowledg- 
ment of her right to Amphipolis, when the revolt of a considerable 
number of her more distant allies engaged her in the ' Social War,' 
the results of which injured her greatly. The war cost her the 
services of her three best generals, Chabrias, Timotheus, and 
Iphicrates j exhausted her treasury, and permanently diminished 
her resources. It likewise greatly tarnished her half-recovered 
reputation. 

Details of the War. Revolt begun — B.C. 358 — by Rhodes, Cos, Chios, 
and Byzantium, which are afterwards joined by Sestus and other Hellespontine 
towns, and are assisted by Mausolus, king of Caria. Unsuccessful siege of 
Chios by Chares and Chabrias, in which Chabrias falls, B.C. 358. Siege of 
Byzantium, B.C. 357. Unsuccessful sea-fight. Chares accuses Timotheus and 
Iphicrates, the former of whom is condemned and goes into exile, while the 
latter is disgraced, being never afterwards employed in any service. — Chares, 
Charidemus, and Phocion in command, B.C. 356, assist the revolted satrap, 
Artabazus, in order to obtain money to pay their sailors. Victory gained over 
Tithraustes. The Persian court threatens vengeance, and Athens hastily 
makes peace, B.C. 355, acknowledging the independence of the four rebel 
states. 



192 GRECIAN STATES. [book in. 

43. The period of the 'Social War' was also disastrous for 

Athens in another respect. So completely did the struggle with 

J. her allies occupy her attention, so incapable was she 

of Athens to at this period of carrying on more than one war at a 
^^^' time, that she allowed Philip to absorb, one after 
another, Amphipolis, Pydna, Potidsea, and Methone, and thus to 
sweep her from the Thermaic Gulf, almost without offering resist- 
ance. At first, indeed, she was cajoled by the crafty monarchy 
but, even when the mask was thrown off, she made no adequate 
effort, but patiently allowed the establishment of Macedonian 
ascendancy over the entire region extending from the Peneus to the 
Nestus. 

43. Before the ' Social War ' had come to an end, another 
exhausting struggle — fatal to Greece in its consequences — was 

5, , begun in the central region of Hellas, through the 

B.C. vindictiveness of Thebes. Down to the battle of 

OK'7 QAf% 

Leuctra, Phocis had fought on the Spartan side, and 

had thus provoked the enmity of Thebes, who now resolved on 

her destruction. The Amphictyonic assembly suffered itself to be 

made the tool of the oppressors ; and, by condemning Phocis to a 

fine which she could not possibly pay, compelled her to fight for 

her existence. A war followed, in which Phocis, by the seizure and 

expenditure of the Delphic treasures, and the assistance, in some 

important conjunctures, of Achsea, Athens, and Sparta, maintained 

herself for eleven years against Thebes and her allies. At last, 

Thebes, blinded by her passionate hatred, called in Philip to her 

assistance, and thus purchased the destruction of her enemy at a 

cost which involved her own ruin and that of Greece generally. 

Sentence of the Amphictyons against Phocis, B.C. 357. Philomelus is made 
General ; he seizes Delphi, and employs its treasures in raising mercenaries. 
After several victories, he is defeated and falls in battle, B.C. 354. Onomarchus, 
brother of Philomelus, takes the command. He conquers Locris and Doris, 
invades Boeotia, and captures Orchomenus, B.C. 353. His aid is implored by 
Lycophron, tyrant of Pherse, who is attacked by Philip. He enters Thessaly 
and joins Lycophron, engages the army of PhiHp, but is defeated and slain, 
B.C. 352. Phayllus succeeds him. Philip threatens Thermopylae, which is 
saved by the promptitude of Athens. War continues with varied success, first 
under Phayllus, and after his death, B. c. 351, under Phalsecus, son of Onomar- 
chus ; but the Delphic treasures being exhausted, the power of Phocis wanes, 
and internal quarrels begin, B.C. 347. Thebes invokes the aid of Philip ; Athens 
is cajoled into standing neutral ; and Phalsecus is forced to surrender at dis- 
cretion, B.C. 346. Philip passes Thermopylae unopposed, crushes Phocis, and 
is rewarded by admission to the Amphictyonic Council in lieu of that state. 

44. The ruin of Greece was now rapidly consummated. 



PER. III.] SUPREMACY OF MACEDON. 193 

Within six years of the submission and punishment of Phocis, 
Philip openly declared war against Athens, the only power in Greece 
capable of offering him any important opposition. His efforts 
at first were directed towards obtaining the command of the 
Bosphorus and Hellespont j but the second ' Sacred War ' gave 
him a pretext for marching his forces through Thermopylse into 
Central Greece j and though Thebes and Athens joined to oppose 
him, the signal victory of Chaeroneia (b.c. 338) laid Greece 
prostrate at his feet. All the states, excepting Sparta, at once 
acknowledged his supremacy j and, to mark distinctly the extinction 
of independent Hellas, and its absorption into the Macedonian 
monarchy, Philip was, in b.c. 337, formally appointed generalissimo 
of united Greece against the Persians. His assassination in the 
next year excited hopes, but produced no real change. The 
aspirations of the patriotic party in Greece after freedom were 
quenched in the blood which deluged revolted Thebes, b,c. 335 j 
and assembled Greece at Corinth once more admitted the head- 
ship of Macedon, and conferred on the youthful Alexander the 
dignity previously granted to his father. 



BOOK IV. 



HISTORY OF THE MACEDONIAN MONARCHY. 



Geographical Outline. 

I. Macedonia Proper was the country lying immediately to the 

north of Thessaly, between Mount Scardus on the one hand and 

-, , . the maritime plain of the Pierians and Bottiaeans 

Macedonia — ^ 

size and (Thracians) on the other. It was bounded towards 
boundaries, ^j^^ riOxl\x by Pseonia, or the country of the Pxonians, 
from which it was separated by an irregular line, running probably 
a little north of the 41st parallel. Its greatest length from 
north to south was about ninety miles, while its width from east 
to west may have averaged seventy miles. Its area was probably 
not much short of 6,000 square miles, or about half that of 
Belgium. 

3. The character of the tract comprised within these limits was 
multiform, but for the most part fertile. High mountain-chains. 
Character of Capped with snow during the greater part of the year, 
the region, and very varied in the directions that they take, 
divide the territory into a number of distinct basins. Some of these 
have a lake in the centre, into which all the superfluous moisture 
drains ; others are watered by rivers, which, with one exception, 
flow eastward to the ^gean. In both cases the basins are of 
large extent, offering to the eye the appearance of a succession 
of plains. The more elevated regions are for the most part richly 
wooded, and abound with sparkling rivulets, deep gorges^ and 
frequent waterfalls ; but in places this character gives way to one 
of dullness and monotony, the traveller passing for miles over 
a succession of bleak downs and bare hill sides, stony and 
shrubless. 



-# 



BOOK IV. PER. I.] MACEDONIA. 195 

3. The principal Rivers of the region were the Lydias, or 
Ludias, now the Karasmak, and the Haliacmon, now the 
Vistritza. Besides these, there was a third stream jy^e^s and 
of some importance, the Erigon, a tributary of the lakes. 
Axius. The chief Lakes were those of Castoria, on a tributary 
of the Haliacmon, of Begorritis (Ostrovo ?) in the country of the 
Eordseans, and the Lydias Palus, near Pella. 

4. Macedonia was divided into ' Upper' and ' Lower/ Upper 

Macedonia comprised the whole of the broad mountainous tract 

which lay between Scardus and Bermius : while 

T ■» i^ 1 . , -1 Divisions. 

Lower Macedonia was the comparatively narrow 

strip along the eastern flank and at the foot of Bermius, between 

that range and the tracts known as Pieria and Bottiaea. Upper 

Macedonia was divided into a number of districts, which for the 

most part took their names from the tribes inhabiting them. 

The principal were, to the north, Pelagonia and Lyncestis, on the 

river Erigon; to the west, Orestis and Elymeia, on the upper 

Haliacmon ; and in the centre^ Eordasa, about Lake Begorritis. 

A good sketch of Macedonian geography is given in Mr. Grote's History 
of Greece, part ii. chap. xxv. The modern travellers who have best described 
the region are 

Leake, Col,, Northern Greece, vol. iii. (See p. 117.) 

Lear, E., Journals of a Landscape Painter. London, 1851 ; large 8vo. 

PONQUEVILLE, Voyage de la Grece. Paris, 1824; 4 vols. 8vo. ; 2nd edition. 

Grisebach, Reisen durch Rumelien und Alba?iien. Gottingen, 1843 ; 8vo. 



HISTORICAL SKETCH. 



FIRST PERIOD. 

From the Commencement of the Monarchy to the Death of Alexander 
the Great, about B.C. 700 to B.C. 323. 

Sources. For the first two centuries Macedonian history is almost a blank, 
nothing but a few names and some mythic tales being preserved to us in 
Herodotus, That writer is the best authority for the reigns of Amyntas I 
and his son Alexander ; but he must be supplemented from Thucydides (ii. 99) 
and Justin. Thucydides is the chief authority for the reign of Perdiccas. 
For the period from Archelaiis to Alexander we depend mainly on Justin and 
Diodorus. Philip's history, however, may be copiously illustrated from the 
Attic orators, especially ^Eschines and Demosthenes ; but these partisan 
writers must not be trusted implicitly. On the history of Alexander the most 
trustworthy of the ancient authorities is Arrian {Expeditio Alexandr'i), who 
followed contemporary writers, especially Aristobulus and Ptolemy Lagi. 
Some interesting particulars are also furnished by Plutarch {Vit. Alex.^, 

o 2 



196 MACEDONIA. [book iv. 

Nearchus {Periplui), and Diodorus (book xvii). The biography of Q. Curtius 
is a rhetorical exercitation, on which it is impossible to place any dependence. 
(A good edition of the Periplus of Nearchus, the only writing of a companion 
of Alexander that has come down to us, is contained in G. Mijller'S 
Geographi Grceci Minores. Paris, 1855 ; 2 vols, tall 8vo.) 

Among modern works specially treating the histories of Philip and 
Alexander the Great, the best are — 

Olivier, Histoire de Philippe, roi de Macedoine. Paris, 1740 ; 2 vols. Svo. 

Leland, History of the Life and Reign of Philip, King of Macedon. London, 
1761 ; 4to. 

Williams, 7 he Life and Actions of Alexander the Great ; originally published 
in the Family Library. London, 1830; Svo. 

Droysen, Geschichte Alexander's des Grossen. Hamburg, 1833 ; Svo. 

I. According to the tradition generally accepted by the Greeks, 

the Macedonian kingdom, which under Philip and Alexander 

, , , . attained to such extraordinary greatness, was founded 

Macedonian •/ «=" ' 

kingdom by Hellenic emigrants from Argos. The Mace- 

^^-BG.ioo^^ donians themselves were not Hellenes j they be- 

Kings till longed to the barbaric races, not greatly differing 

' from the Greeks in ethriic type, but far behind 

them in civilisation, which bordered Hellas upon the north. 

They were a distinct race, not Pasonian, not Illyrian, not 

Thracian ; but, of the three, their connexion was closest with the 

Illyrians. The Argive colony, received hospitably, gradually 

acquired power in the region about Mount Bermius; and Per- 

diccas, one of the original emigrants, was (according to Herodotus) 

acknowledged as king. (Other writers mentioned three kings 

anterior to Perdiccas, whose joint reigns covered the space of 

about a century.) The period which follows is one of great 

obscurity, little being known of it but the names of the kings. 

Kings from Perdiccas I to Amyntas I : — 1. Perdiccas L Reigned 
nearly fifty years, from about B.C. 700 to 650. Succeeded by 2. Argaeus, his 
son, who reigned about thirty years, B.C. 650 to 620. After him came his son, 
3. Philip I, who also reigned about thirty years, B.C. 620 to 590. Philip was 
succeeded by his son, 4. Aeropus, whose reign lasted about twenty-five 
years, B.C. 590 to 565; and Aeropus by his son, 5. Alcetas, whose reign 
lasted twenty-eight or twenty-nine years, B.C. 565 to 537. Alcetas was 
followed by his son, 6. Amyntas I, who was king at the time of the ex- 
pedition conducted by Megabazus, B.C. 507. 

2. With Amyntas I, who was contemporary with Darius 

„. ^ Hystaspis, light dawns upon Macedonian history. 

Time of con- ; r j 1 . 1 

quest. We find that by this time the Macedonian monarchs 

J2'"'!i''°'^ o^ this line had made themselves masters of Pieria 

01 Macedonia 

to Persia, and Bottisea, had crossed the Axius and conquered 

Mygdonia and Anthemus, had dislodged the original 

Eordi from Eordia and themselves occupied it, and had dealt 



PEE. 1.] EARLY KINGDOM, 197 

similarly with the Aim opes in Almopia on the Rhoedias. But the 
advance of the Persians into Europe gave a sudden check to this 
period of prosperity. After a submission which was more nominal 
than real, in B.C. 507, the Macedonians, in b.c. 49 2, became 
Persian subjects, retaining however their own kings, who accepted 
the position of tributaries. Amyntas I, who appears to have died 
about B.C. 498, was succeeded by his son, Alexander I, king at the 
time of the great invasion of Xerxes, who played no unimportant 
part in the expedition, b.c. 480 to 470. 

3. The repulse of the Persians set Macedonia free • and the 
career of conquest appears to have been at once resumed. 
Crestonaea and Bisaltia were reduced, and the 

Career 

Macedonian dominion pushed eastward almost to of conquest 

the Strymon. The authority of the monarchs of I'^sumed. 

Pella was likewise extended over most of the inland Macedonian 

tribes, as the Lyncestse, the Eleimiots, and others, who however 

retained their own kings. 

Alexander, the son of Amyntas, is said to have reigned either forty-three 
or forty-four years, probably from about B.C. 498 to 454. Perdiccas, his son 
and successor, reigned probably forty-one years, from B.C. 454 to 413. 

4. But Macedonia was about this time herself exposed to attacks 
from two unquiet neighbours. The maritime confederacy of 
Athens, which gave her a paramount authority Wars of 
over the Greek cities in Chalcidice, and even over ^j^h Thrace 
Methone in Pieria, brought the Athenians into the and Athens. 
near neighbourhood of Macedon, and necessitated relations between 
the two Powers, which were at first friendly, but which grew to be 
hostile when Athens by her colony at Amphipolis put a check 
to the further progress of Macedon in that direction ; and were 
still more embittered by the encouragement which Athens gave 
to Macedonian chiefs who rebelled against their sovereign. About 
the same time, a powerful Thracian kingdom was formed under 
Sitalces, b.c. 440 to 420, which threatened destruction to the 
far smaller Macedonian state with which it was conterminous. 
Macedonia, however, under the adroit Perdiccas, escaped both 
dangers ; and, on the whole, increased in prosperity. 

Commencement of differences with Athens, probably about B.C. 437, when 
Amphipolis was colonised. Support given to the brother of Perdiccas, Philip, 
and a chief named Derdas. Perdiccas retaliates by exciting the subject- allies 
of Athens to revolt, B.C. 432. Revolt of Potidaea, supported by Perdiccas, 
B.C. 432 to 430. Invasion of Sitalces, B.C. 429. Peace made by a marriage 



1 9 8 MA CEDONIA . [book iv. 

between Seuthes, nephew and heir of Sitalces, and Stratonice, sister of Per- 
diccas. Invitation given by Perdiccas to Brasidas, B.C. 424, greatly damages 
Athens. War between Perdiccas and Athens continues, with intervals of 
peace, down to B.C. 416. 

5. The reign of Archelaus, the bastard son of Perdiccas II, 
though short, was very important for Macedon, since this prince 

Brilliant reign laid the foundation of her military greatness by the 
^^ ^B ^c!^^""^' attention which he paid to the army, while at the 
413-399. same time he strengthened and improved the country 
by the construction of highways and of forts. He was also the 
first of the Macedonian princes who endeavoured to encourage 
among his people a taste for Greek literature. Euripides the 
tragedian was welcomed to his court, as also was Plato the 
philosopher, and perhaps Hellanicus the historian. He engaged 
in wars with some of the Macedonian princes^ as particularly with 
Arrhibxus j but he was relieved from all hostile collision with 
Athens by the Sicilian disaster. The character of Archelaiis was 
sanguinary and treacherous ; in his habits he was licentious. 
After reigning fourteen years he was assassinated by the victims 
of his lust, B.C. 399. 

6. The murder of Archelaiis introduced a period of disturbance, 
both internal and external, which lasted till the accession of 

Forty years Philip, B.C. 359. During this interval the Mace- 
^^^^^J^^'^^' dorian court was a constant scene of plots and 
399-359. assassinations. The direct line of succession 
having failed, numerous pretenders to the crown sprang up, who 
at different times found supporters in the Illyrians, the Lacedaemo- 
nians, the Thebans, and the Athenians. Civil wars were almost 
perpetual. Kings were driven from their thrones and recovered 
them. There were at least two regencies. So violent were the 
commotions that it seemed doubtful whether the kingdom could 
long continue to maintain its existence j and, if the Olynthian 
league had been allowed to constitute itself without interference, 
it is not unlikely that Macedon would have been absorbed, either 
by that confederacy or by the Illyrians. 

Kings and Regents from B.C. 399 to 359: — 1. Orestes, son of Archelaiis, 
a minor. Reigns four years under the guardianship of Aeropus, B.C. 399 to 
395. 2. Aeropus, having murdered Orestes, reigns nearly two years as actual 
king, B.C. 395 to 394. He is succeeded by his son, 3. Pausanias, who reigns 
one year, when he is assassinated by Amyntas II, B.C. 393. 4. Amyntas II 
has a reign which lasts, from its first year to its last, twenty-four years, B. c. 
393 to 369 ; but during a part of this time he is expelled from his kingdom. 
5. Argeus, the brother of Pausanias, reigns during the two years, B.C. 392 



PER. I.] REIGN OF PHILIP. 199 

and 391. Amyntas then recovers his kingdom, and retains it to his death, in 
B.C. 369; but during these years he is several times reduced to the last 
extremity. At one time the Illyrians, at another the Olynthians, press him 
hard ; and it is only by the aid of Sparta that he is able to maintain himself. 
6. Alexander II, the son of Amyntas, succeeded him, and reigned between 
one and two years, when he was murdered by Ptolemy of Alorus, who became 
regent for Perdiccas, the brother of Alexander II, B.C. 368, and was estab- 
lished in that position by Pelopidas. (See p. 189.) He held the supreme 
power for a little more than three years, and was then murdered in his turn 
by Perdiccas III, B.C. 364. 7. Perdiccas III reigned iive years, B.C. 364 
to 359. The Athenians assisted him against the claims of a pretender named 
Pausanias ; but shortly afterwards he fell in a war against the Illyrians, B.C. 
359, leaving behind him an infant son, Amyntas. He was succeeded, how- 
ever, on the throne by his brother, Philip II. 

7. The reign of Philip is the turning-point in Macedonian 

history. Hitherto, if we except Archelaiis, Macedonia had not 

possessed a single king whose abilities exceeded the . 

^ cj <j Accession of 

common average, or whose aims had about them any- Philip, 
thing of grandeur. Notwithstanding their asserted ^" °" ^^^* 
and even admitted Hellenism, the ' barbarian ' character of their 
training and associations had its effect on the whole line of 
sovereigns j and their highest qualities were the rude valour and 
the sagacity bordering upon cunning which are seldom wanting 
in savages. But Philip was a monarch of a different stamp. In 
natural ability he was at least the equal of any of his Greek con- 
temporaries j while the circumstances under which he grew to 
manhood were peculiarly favourable to the development of his 
talents. At the impressible age of fifteen, he was sent as a hostage 
to Thebes, where he resided for the greater part of three years 
(b. c. 368 to '^fi^.) while that state was at the height of its pros- 
perity under Pelopidas and Epaminondas. He was thus brought 
into contact with those great men, was led to study their system, 
and emulate their actions. He learnt the great importance of 
military training, and the value of inventiveness to those who 
wish to succeed in war • he also acquired a facility of expressing 
himself in Greek, which was uncommon in a Macedonian. 

8. The situation of Philip at his accession was one of extreme 
embarrassment and difficulty. Besides Amyntas, his nephew, for 
whom he at first professed to be regent, there were condition of 
at least five pretenders to the throne, two of whom, Macedonian 
Pausanias and Argseus, were supported by the arms of successes of 
foreigners. The Illyrians, moreover, had recently Phihp. 
gained a great victory over Perdiccas, and, flushed with success, 
had advanced into Macedonia and occupied most of the western 



200 MACEDONIA, [book iv, 

provinces. Pseonia on the north, and Thrace upon the east, were 
unquiet neighbours_, whose hostility might be counted on whenever 
other perils threatened. Within two years^ however, Philip had 
repressed or overthrown all these enemies, and found himself free to 
commence those wars of aggression by which he converted the 
monarchy of Macedon into an empire. 

Peace purchased from Thrace, B.C. 359. Negotiations with Athens. 
Amphipolis evacuated. Argseus defeated and captured. Pseonia invaded, 
B.C. 358. Great defeat of the Illyrians under Bardylis. Macedonian frontier 
pushed westward to Lake Lychnitis. Phihp proclaimed king, B.C. 359. 

9. Hitherto it had been the policy of Philip to profess himself 
a friend of the Athenians. Now, however, that his hands were 
Aggressions free, it was his first object to disembarrass himself 
"^°^B^*^"^' °^ these near neighbours_, who blocked up his coast- 
358, 357. line, watched his movements, and might seriously 
interfere with the execution of his projects. Accordingly, towards 
the close of b. c. 358^ when Athens was already engaged in the 
'Social War,' he suddenly laid siege to Amphipolis. Having 
taken the town^ while he amused Athens with promises, he pro- 
ceeded to attack and capture Pydna and Potidaea, actual Athenian 
possessions, making over the latter to Olynthus, to foment jealousy 
between her and Athens. He then conquered the entire coast 
district between the Strymon and the Nestus, thus becoming 
master of the important Thracian gold-mines, from which he 
shortly derived an annual revenue of a thousand talents ! 

Marriage of Philip with Olympias, B.C. 357. Foundation of Philippopolis, 
or Philippi, on the site of Crenides, for the protection of the gold-mines. 
Birth of Alexander, B.C. 356. 

I o. The year after these conquests we find Philip in Thessaly, 

where he interferes to protect the Aleuadse of Larissa against the 

^ , ,. tyrants of Pherse. The tyrants call in the aid of the 

Absorption •' ■' 

of Thessaly, Phocians, then at the zenith of their power, and 
B.C. 352. Philip suffers certain reverses ; but a few years later 
he is completely victorious, defeats and kills Onomarchus_, and 
brings under his dominion the whole of Thessaly, together with 
Magnesia and Achaea Phthiotis. At the same time, he conquers 
Methone, the last Athenian possession on the coast of Macedon, 
attacks Maroneia^ and threatens the Chersonese. Athens, the sole 
power which could effectually have checked these successes, made 
only slight and feeble efforts to prevent them. Already Philip had 



PEE. I.] REIGN OF PHILIP. 201 

found the advantage of having friends among the Attic orators j 
and their labours^ backed by the selfish indolence which now 
characterised the Athenians^ produced an inaction, which had the 
most fatal consequences. 

First expedition of Philip into Thessaly, B.C. 355. Conquest of Methone, 
B.C. 354. Second expedition into Thessaly, B.C. 353. Philip twice defeated 
by Onomarchus. Third expedition ; victory of Philip ; Onomarchus slain, 
B.C. 352. 

11. The victory of Philip over Onomarchus roused Athens to 
exertion. Advancing to Thermopylae, Philip found the pass 
already occupied by an Athenian arm.y, and did not 

venture to attack it. Greece was saved for the of the 
timej but six years later the folly of the Thebans, 'Sacred War.' 
and the fears of the Athenians^ who were driven to despair by the 
ill success of the Olynthian and Euboic wars, admitted the Mace- 
donian conqueror within the barrier. Accepted as head of the 
league against the impious Phocians, Philip in a few weeks brought 
the ' Sacred War " to an end^ obtaining as his reward the seat in 
the Amphictyonic Council of which the Phocians were deprived, 
and thus acquiring a sort of right to intermeddle as much as he 
liked in the affairs of Central and even Southern Hellas. 

Attempt to pass Thermopylae fails, B.C. 352. Philip attacks Herseon-teichos. 
His navy damages the commerce of Athens, B.C. 351. Olynthian war com- 
mences, B.C. 350. Euboea revolts from Athens, B.C. 349. Victory of Phocion 
at Tamynae. Olynthian war ended by the capture and destruction of Olyn- 
thus and thirty-one other Chalcidic cities, B. c. 347. Despair of Athens. The 
Thebans invite Philip to conduct the war against the Phocians. Athens nego- 
tiates a peace, deserting the Phocians, who, as they cannot hold Thermopylae 
without the aid of the Athenian fleet, are compelled to make their submission, 
B.C. 346. Philip enters Phocis, reduces all the towns, and disperses the in- 
habitants into villages. Accepted into the Amphictyonic League, he neces- 
sarily becomes its head. 

12. The main causes of Philip's wonderful success were two- 
fold: — [a) Bettering the lessons taught him by his model in the 
art of war, Epaminondas, he had armed, equipped. Causes of 
and trained the Macedonian forces till they were ^^'^^P.^, 

■' wondenul 

decidedly superior to the troops of any state in success. 
Greece. The Macedonian phalanx, invincible until it came to 
be opposed to the Romans, was his conception and his work. 
Nor was he content with excellence in one arm of the service. 
On every branch he bestowed equal care and thought. Each was 
brought into a state nearly approaching perfection. His cavalry, 
heavy and light, his peltasts, archers, slingers, darters, were all the 



202 MACEDONIA. [book iv. 

best of their kind • his artillery was numerous and effective ^ his 
commissariat service was well arranged, {h) At the same time, 
he was a master of finesse. Taking advantage of the divided con- 
dition of Greece, and of the general prevalence of corruption 
among the citizens of almost every community, he played off state 
against state and politician against politician. Masking his pur- 
poses up to the last moment, promising, cajoling, bribing, intimi- 
dating, protesting, he advanced his interests even more by diplo- 
macy than by force, having an infinite fund of artifice from which 
to draw, and scarcely ever recurring to means which he had used 
previously. 

To these main causes must be added, (i) the extraordinary activity of the 
man, who scarcely ever rested a moment, and who seemed almost to possess 
the power of being in several places at once ; and (2) the dechne of patriotism, 
public spirit, and even courage in Greece — seen especially in the apathy of 
Athens, but really pervading the whole Hellenic world, which had passed its 
prime and was entering on the period of decay. A certain impetus was 
doubtless given to the general decline by the plunder of Delphi, which began 
by shocking and ended by depraving the national conscience ; but the seat of 
the malady lay deeper ; the precocious race was, in fact, prematurely ex- 
hausted, and under no circumstances could the pristine vigour have been 
recovered. 

13, Philip had made peace with Athens in order to lay hold on 
Thermopylae — a hold which he never afterwards relaxed. But it 

,, .,. . . was far from his intention to maintain the peace 

Hostilities m ^ 

Eastern an hour longer than suited his purpose. Having 
^^'^^' once more chastised the Illyrian and Pseonian tribes, 
he proceeded to invade Eastern Thrace, and to threaten the Athe- 
nian possessions in that quarter. At the same time, he aimed at 
getting into his hands the command of the Bosphorus, which 
would have enabled him to starve Greece into submission by 
stopping the importation of corn. Here, however, Persia (which 
had at last come to feel alarm at his progress) combined with 
Athens to resist him. Perinthus and Byzantium were saved, and 
the ambition of Philip was for the time thwarted. 

The peace with Athens lasted, nominally, six years, B.C. 346 to 340. But 
Philip's aggressions re-commenced as early as B.C. 343. He occupied Halonne- 
sus, intrigued in Euboea, and invaded the Chersonese, where Diopeithes opposed 
him with some success. In B.C. 341 Athens wrested Euboea from his grasp; 
and in B.C. 340 war was declared formally on both sides. Philip laid siege in 
succession to Perinthus and Byzantium, but was foiled in both attacks, partly 
by Persian troops, partly by the fleet of Athens under Phocion. The credit 
of the Athenian successes at this time is due mainly to the counsels of 
Demosthenes. 

14. But the indefatigable warrior, baulked of his prey, and 



PER. I.] REIGN OF PHILIP. 203 

obliged to wait till Grecian affairs should take a turn more favour- 
able to him, marched suddenly northwards and en- Campaign on 
gaged in a campaign on the Lower Danube against ^Danube^'^ 
a Scythian prince who held the tract now known as b. c. 339. 
Bulgaria. Victorious here, he re-crossed the Balkan with a large 
body of captives, when he was set upon by the Triballi (Thra- 
cians), defeated, and wounded in the thigh, b. c. 339. The wound 
necessitated a short period of inaction • but while the arch-plotter 
rested, his agents were busily at work, and the year of the Tribal- 
lian defeat saw the fatal step taken, which was once more to 
bring a Macedonian army into the heart of Greece, and to destroy 
the last remaining chance of the cause of Hellenic freedom. 

Disturbance at the Amphictyonic Congress of March, B.C. 339. ^schines 
procures a decree against the Locrians of Amphissa, Refusal of Athens and 
Thebes to join in the new crusade. Attempt to execute the decree fails. Aid 
of Philip invoked. He consents, and marches southwards. 

15. Appointed by the Amphictyons as their leader in a new 
' Sacred War,' Philip once more passed Thermopylae and entered 
Phocis. But he soon showed that he came on no Second expe- 
trivial or temporary errand. The occupation of pl'-V°"°^ 
Nicsea^ Cytinium, and more especially of Elateia, be- Greece, 
trayed his intention of henceforth holding; possession ^^'^^ °^ 

•' <=> ^ Cnseroneia, 

of Central Greece, and roused the two principal b. c. 338. 
powers of the region to a last desperate effort. Thebes and 
Athens met him at Chaeroneia in full force, with contingents from 
Corinth, Phocis^ and Achsea. But the Macedonian phalanx was 
irresistible- and the complete defeat of the allies laid Greece at 
Philip's feet. The Congress of Corinth (b. c. 337), attended by 
all the states except Sparta_, which proudly stood aloof^ accepted the 
headship of Macedon; and the cities generally undertook to supply 
contingents to the force which he designed to lead against Persia. 

16. This design, however, was not executed. Great prepara- 
tions were made in the course of b. c. 337 ; and early in b. c. '3^'3jS 
the vanguard of the Macedonian army was sent Desien to 
across into Asia. But, a few months later, the invade Persia. 
sword of Pausanias terminated the career of the assassinated, 
Macedonian monarch, who fell a victim, in part ^- ^- '^^^• 

to his unwillingness, or his inability to execute justice upon 
powerful offenders, in part to the quarrels and dissensions in his 
own family. Olympias certainly, Alexander probably, connived 



204 MACEDONIA. [book iv. 

at the assassination of Philip, whose removal was necessary to 
their own safety. He died at the age of forty-seven, after a reign 
of twenty-three years. 

17. It is difficult to say what exactly was the government of 
Macedonia under this prince. Practically, the monarch must have 

Character been nearly absolute j but it would appear that, 

Macedonian theoretically, he was bound to govern according to 

government, certain long-established laws and customs; and it 

may be questioned whether he would have dared at any time to 

transgress, flagrantly and openly^ any such law or usage. The 

Macedonian nobles were turbulent and free of speech. If accused 

of conspiracy or other crime, they were entitled to be tried before 

the public assembly. Their power must certainly have been to 

some extent a check upon the monarch. And after the formation 

of a great standing army, it became necessary for the monarch to 

consult the feelings and conform his acts to the wishes of the 

soldiers. But there seems to have been no such regular machinery 

for checking and controlling the royal authority as is implied in 

constitutional government. 

Flathe, Geschichte Makedoniens. Leipzig, 1832-34; 2 vols. 8vo. Contains 
an over-statement of the constitutional character of the Macedonian govern- 
ment, 

18. The reign of Alexander the Great has in the history of the 
world much the same importance which that of his father has in 

the history of Macedonia and of Greece. Alexander 
^ande°r the^^" revolutionised the East, or, at any rate, so much of 
Great, B.C. j^ ^g was connected with the West by intercourse 

336-323. , . r, rr., , r 

or reciprocal influence. The results or a conquest 
effected in ten years continued for as many centuries, and remain 
in some respects to the present day. The Hellenisation of 
Western Asia and North-Eastern Africa_, which dates from 
Alexander's successes, is one of the most remarkable facts in 
the history of the human race, and one of those most pregnant 
with important consequences. It is as absurd to deny to the 
author of such a revolution the possession of extraordinary genius 
as to suppose that the Iliad could have been written by a man of 
no particular ability. 

See, on the Hellenisation of Asia, in part by Alexander, in part by his 
successors, the important work of 

Droysen, Geschichte des Hellenismus oder der Bildung des Hellenistischen Staaten 
Systemes. Hamburg, 1843; 8vo. 



PEK. I.] REIGN OF ALEXANDER. 205 

19. The situation of Alexander, on his accession, was extremely 
critical ; and it depended wholly on his own energy and force 
of character whether he would retain his father's j^jg ^^^^y diffi- 
power or lose it. His position was far from as- culties. He is 
sured at home, where he had many rivals ; and the leadership 
among the conquered nations there was a general of Greece, 
inclination to test the qualities of the new and young prince by 
the assertion of independence. But Alexander was equal to the 
occasion. Seizing the throne without a moment's hesitation, he 
executed or drove out his rivals. Forestalling any open hostility 
on the part of the Greeks, he marched hastily, at the head of a 
large army, through Thessaly, Phocis, and Boeotia, to Corinth, and 
there required, and obtained, from the deputies whom he had 
convened to meet him, the same ' hegemony/ or leadership, 
which had been granted to his father. Sparta alone, as she had 
done before, stood aloof. From Corinth, Alexander retraced his 
steps to Macedon, and thence proceeded to chastise ^ 

. . Campaigns m 

his enemies in the north and west, invading Thrace, Thrace and 
defeating the Triballi and the Getae, and even IHyna. 
crossing the Danube ; after which he turned southward, and 
attacked and defeated the Illyrians under Clitus and Glaucias. 

%o. Meanwhile, in Greece, a false report of Alexander's death 
induced Thebes to raise the standard of revolt. A general insur- 
rection might have followed but for the promptness 
and celerity of the young monarch. Marching straight destruction 
from Illyria, southwards, he appeared suddenly in of Thebes, 
Boeotia, stormed and took Thebes, and, after a 
wholesale massacre, punished the survivors by completely de- 
stroying their city and selling them all as slaves. This signal 
vengeance had the effect intended. All Greece was terror-struck \ 
and Alexander could feel that he might commence his Asiatic 
enterprise in tolerable security. Greece was now not likely to 
rebel, unless he suffered some considerable reverse. 

31. In the spring of B.C. 334 Alexander passed the Hellespont 
with an army numbering about 35,000 men. The usual remiss- 
ness of the Persians allowed him to cross without passage of the 
opposition. A plan of operations, suggested by Hellespont. 
Memnon the Rhodian, which consisted in avoiding Granicus, 
an engagement in Asia Minor, and carrying the ^•^- ^^'*" 
war into Macedonia by means of the overwhelming Persian fleet. 



2o6 MACEDONIA. [book iv. 

was rejected, and battle was given to Alexander, on the Granicus, 
by a force only a little superior to his own. The victory of the 
invader placed Asia Minor at his mercy, and Alexander with his 
usual celerity proceeded to overrun it. Still, he seems to have 
been unwilling to remove his army very far from the ^Egean 
coastj so long as Memnon was alive. But the death of that able 
commander, in the spring of b. c. q^'^^,') ^^^ him free to act ; and 
he at once took the road which led to the heart of the Persian 
empire. 

23. The conflict at Issus between Alexander and Darius himself 

was brought on under circumstances peculiarly favourable to the 

, , , Macedonian monarch. Darius had intended to fight 

Battle of Issus, . , , . ^ . . , , , . 

November, m the plam of Antioch, where his vast army would 
Con'^uefts of ^^^^ ^^'^ room to act. But, as Alexander did not 

Tyre, Gaza, come to meet him, he grew impatient, and advanced 
gyp ■ jj^^Q ^i^g defiles which lie between Syria and Cilicia. 
The armies met, almost without warning, in a position where 
numbers gave no advantage. Under such circumstances the 
defeat of the Persians was a matter of course. Alexander deserves 
less credit for the victory of Issus than for the use he made of it. 
It was a wise and far-seeing policy which disdained the simple plan 
of pressing forward on a defeated foe, and preferred to let him 
escape and re-organise his forces, while the victory was utilised 
in another way. Once possessed of the command of the sea, 
Alexander would be completely , secure at home. He therefore 
proceeded from Issus against Tyre, Gaza, and Egypt. Twenty 
months sufficed for the reduction of these places. Having pos- 
sessed himself of all the maritime provinces of Persia, Alexander, 
in B.C. 331, proceeded to seek his enemy in the heart of his 
empire. 

The foundation of Alexandria in the most favourable situation for com- 
merce that Egypt offers, indicated that Alexander was no vulgar conqueror, 
but one with far-sighted aims and projects. Alexandria, as the capital of a 
separate kingdom, may have grown to be more than its founder ever intended ; 
but it could under no circumstances have failed to become a great city. 
Alexander deserves credit both for conceiving the idea of changing the 
capital, and for fixing on so excellent a site. 

33. In the final conflict, near Arbela, the relative strength of 
Battle of Arbela, ^^^ ^^o contending parties was fairly tried. Darius 

B.C. 331. had collected the full force of his empire, had se- 
lected and prepared his ground, and had even obtained the aid 



PEE. I.] ALEXANDERS CONQUESTS. 207 

of allies. His defeat was owing, in part, to the intrinsic su- 
periority of the European over the Asiatic soldier': „ 

. surrender of 

in part, and in great part, to the consummate Babylon, Susa, 
ability of the Macedonian commander. The con- ^^^ fersepolis. 
flict was absolutely decisive, for it was impossible that any battle 
should be fought under conditions more favourable to Persia. 
Accordingly, the three capitals, Babylon, Susa, and Persepolis, 
surrendered, almost without resistance ; and the Persian monarch 
became a fugitive, and was ere long murdered by his servants. 

Agis, the Spartan king, heads an insurrection in Greece ; but is attacked 
and defeated by Antipater, b. c. 330. 

24. The most remarkable part of Alexander's career now com- 
mences. An ordinary conqueror would have been satisfied with 
the submission of the great capitals, and would have Conquest of the 
awaited, in the luxurious abodes which they offered, north-eastem 

, „ . ^ , ,. . -n provinces, and 

the adhesion or the more distant provinces. But invasion of 
for Alexander rest possessed no attractions. So India. 

long as there were lands or men to conquer^ it was his delight to 
subjugate them. The pursuit of Darius, and then of Bessus, drew 
him on to the north-eastern corner of the Persian Empire, whence 
the way was open into a new world, generally believed to be one 
of immense wealth. From Bactria and Sogdiana, Alexander pro- 
ceeded through Affghanistan to India, which he entered on the 
side whence alone India is accessible by land, viz. the north-west. 
At first he warred with the princes who had held their govern- 
ments as dependencies of Persia ; but, when these had submitted, 
he desired still to press eastward^ and complete the subjugation 
of the continent, which was believed to terminate at no great 
distance. The refusal of his soldiers to proceed stopped him at 
the Sutlej, and forced him to relinquish his designs, and to bend 
his steps homewards. 

Details of the March to Bactria and. India. Advance to Ecbatana, 
B.C. 330. March thence to Rhages. Murder of Darius by Bessus. Flight 
of Bessus. Conquest of Hyrcania, Aria, and Drangiana. Trial and execution 
of Philotas. Execution of Parmenio. Invasion of Bactria and capture of 
Bessus, B. c. 329. March to the Jaxartes. Conquest of Bactria and Sogdiana, 
B.C. 328-7. Murder of Clitus. Execution of Callisthenes. March to the 
Indus, B.C. 326. Defeat of Porus. Advance to the Hyphasis (Sutlej) — 
refusal of the troops to proceed further. Descent of the Indus, B. c. 326-5. 

25. It was characteristic of Alexander, that, even when com- 
pelled to desist from a forward movement, he did not retrace his 



2o8 MACEDONIA. [book iv. 

steps, but returned to the Persian capital by an entirely new 
route. Following the course of the Indus in ships built for the 
purpose, while his army marched along the banks, he conquered 
the valley as he descended, and, having reached the ocean, pro- 
ceeded with the bulk of his troops westward through Gedrosia 
(Beloochistan) and Carmania into Persia. Meanwhile his 
admiral^ Nearchus, sailed from the Indus to the Euphrates, thus 
re-opening a line of communication which had probably been 
little used since the time of Darius Hystaspis. Alexander, in his 
march, experienced terrible difiGcultiesj and the losses incurred 
in the Gedrosian desert exceeded those of all the rest of the 
expedition. Still he brought back to Persepolis the greater portion 
of his army, and found himself in a position, not only to maintain 
his conquests, but to undertake fresh ones, for the purpose of 
rounding off and completing his empire. 

The voyage of Nearchus lasted five months, from the end of September, 
B.C. 325, to the end of February, B.C. 324. Alexander's land march from the 
Indus to Persepolis, the greatest feat that he ever performed, occupied about 
the same period. We must ascribe to the prestige of his previous successes 
the fact that he was not attacked and crushed on this return march through 
trackless and utterly desert regions. 

Nearchus' voyage was treated, in the last century, by Vincent, whose 
work, The Voyage of Nearchus from the Indus to the Euphrates (London, 1797 ; 
4to.), was very creditable to the author. A better comment on the text will, 
however, be found in the Geographi Grceci Minores of Mons. C. Muller. 
(See above, p. 196.) 

36. It was the intention of Alexander, after taking the measures 
which he thought advisable for the consolidation of his empire, 
and the improvement of his intended capital, Babylon, to attempt 
the conquest of the peninsula of Arabia — a vast tract, incon- 
veniently interposed between his western and his eastern pro- 
vinces. A fleet, under Nearchus, was to have proceeded along 
the coast, whilst Alexander, with an immense host, traversed the 
interior. But these plans were brought to an end by the sudden 
death of their projector at Babylon, in the thirteenth year of his 
reign and the thirty-third of his age, June, B.C. 323. This pre- 
mature demise makes it impossible to determine whether, or no, 
the political wisdom of Alexander was on a par with his strategic 
ability — whether, or no, he would have succeeded in consolidating 
and uniting his heterogeneous conquests, and have proved the 
Darius as well as the Cyrus of his empire. Cut off unexpectedly 
in the vigour of early manhood, he left no inheritor, either of his 
power or of his projects. The empire which he had constructed 



PEB. II.] DEATH OF ALEXANDER. 209 

broke into fragments soon after his death ; and his plans, what- 
ever they were, perished with him. 

The policy of Alexander, so far as appears, aimed at complete fusion and 
amalgamation of his own Graeco-Macedonian subjects with the dominant race 
of the subjugated countries, the Medo-Persians. He felt the difficulty of 
holding such extensive conquests by garrisons of Europeans, and therefore 
determined to associate in the task of ruling and governing the Asiatic race 
which had shown itself most capable of those high functions. Ultimately, he 
would have fused the two peoples into one by translations of populations and 
inter-marriages. Meanwhile, he united the two in the military and civil 
services, incorporating 20,000 Persians into his phalanx, appointing many 
Persians to satrapies, and composing his court pretty equally of Persian and 
Macedonian noblemen. His scheme had the merits of originality and intrinsic 
fairness. Its execution would undoubtedly have elevated Asia to a point 
which she has never yet reached. But this advantage could not have been 
gained without some counterbalancing loss. The mixed people which it was 
his object to produce, while vastly superior to ordinary Asiatics, would have 
fallen far below the Hellenic, perhaps even below the Macedonian, type. It is 
thus not much to be regretted that the scheme was nipped in the bud, and 
Hellenic culture preserved in tolerable purity to exercise a paramount 
influence over the Roman, and so over the modern, world. 

The death of Alexander has been ascribed by some to poison, by others to 
habitual drunkenness. But the hardships of the Gedrosian march and the 
unhealthiness of the Chaldsean marshes sufficiently account for it. 



SECOND PEBIOD. 

From the Death of Alexander the Great to the Battle of Ipsus, 

B. C. 323 to 301. 

SoTirees. The main authoi-ity for this period is DiODORUS, books xviii. to xx. 
He appears to have followed, in this portion of his History, the contemporary 
author, Hieronymus of Cardia, who wrote an account of Alexander and his 
successors, about B.C. 270. Plutarch's lives of Eumenes, Demetrius, and 
Phocion are also of considerable value ; for, though he draws generally from 
DiODORUS, yet occasionally he has recourse to independent authorities, e.g. 
DuRis of Samos, who wrote a Greek and also a Macedonian History, about 
B.C. 280. The thirteenth book of Justin's History and the fragments of 
Arrian and Dexippus should also be consulted. For these fragments, see 
the Fragmenta Historicorum Grcecorum of C. MiJLLER, vol. iii. 

Among modern works especially treating of the period, the best is 

DroysEN, Geschichte der Nachfolger Alexander's des Grossen. Hamburg, 
1836-43 ; 2 vols. 8vo. 

The student will do well to consult also chaps, xcv, and xcvi. of Mr. 
Grote's Bistory^ of Greece, and chaps. Ivi.-lix. of Bishop Thirlwall's work 
on the same subject. 

I. The circumstances under which Alexander died led naturally 

to a period of convulsion. He left at his death no legitimate 

Troubles issue, and designated no successor. The Macedo- 

'^Alexander's^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^ succession was uncertain ; and, of those 

death. who had the best title to the throne, there was not 

one who could be considered by any unprejudiced person worthy 



2IO MACEDONIA. [book iv. 

of it. The great generals of the deceased king became thus, 
almost of necessity, aspirants to the regal dignity ; and it was 
scarcely possible that their rival claims could be settled without 
an appeal to arms and a long and bloody struggle. For a time, 
the fiction of a united Macedonian Empire under the sovereignty 
of the old royal family was kept up; but from the first the generals 
were the real depositories of power, and practically a division of 
authority took effect almost from Alexander's death. 

Alexander left behind him an illegitimate son, named Hercules, a boy ten 
or twelve years old. He also left Roxana pregnant. The other living mem- 
bers of the royal family were Arrhidseus, his half-brother, a bastard son of 
Philip, who was grown up ; Cleopatra, Gynane, and Thessalonica, his sisters ; 
and Eurydic6, his niece, daughter of Gynane and Amyntas, son of Perdiccas HI. 
Olympias also, the widow of Philip and mother of Alexander, was still living. 

3. The difficulty with respect to the succession was terminated 

without bloodshed. The claims of Hercules being passed over, 

- Arrhidseus, who was at Babylon, was proclaimed 

the succession king under the name of Philip, and with the under- 

— legents. standing that he was to share the empire with 

Roxana^s child, if she should give birth to a boy. At the same 

time, four guardians, or regents, were appointed — Antipater arid 

Craterus in Europe, Perdiccas and Leonnatus (for whom was soon 

afterwards substituted Meleager) in Asia. But the murder of 

Meleager by Perdiccas shortly reduced the number of guardians 

to three. 

3. The sole command of the ■ great army of Asia, assumed by 
Perdiccas on the death of Meleager, made his position vastly 

Great power superior to that of his European colleagues, and 

of Perdiccas. enabled him to take the entire direction of affairs 

He distri- , ,- , t t 1 1 t-. • • 

butes the on his own Side of the Hellespont. But, to maintain 
provinces, ^j^jg position, it was necessary for him to content the 
other great military chiefs, who had lately been his equals, and who 
would not have been satisfied to remain very much his inferiors. 
Accordingly, a distribution of satrapies was made within a few 
weeks of Alexander's death; and each chief of any pretensions 
received a province proportioned to his merits or his influence. 

In this partition, Ptolemy Lagi, reputed an illegitimate son of Philip, 
received Egypt ; Pithon, Media ; Antigonus, Phrygia, Lycia, and Pamphylia ; 
Eumenes the Gardian, Gappadocia, which remained, however, still to be con- 
quered ; Leonnatus, Mysia ; Lysimachus, Macedonian Thrace ; Menander, 
Lydia; Asander, Garia; Philotas, Gilicia; and Laomedon, Syria. Nearchus, 
Alexander's admiral, received the government of Lycia and Pamphylia, as 



PER. II.] SUCCESSORS OF ALEXANDER. 211 

sub-satrap under Antigonus; and Cleomenes remained in a similar position 
under Ptolemy Lagi. The other provinces continued under the governors 
appointed by Alexander. 

4. It was not the intention of Perdiccas to break up the unity 
of Alexander's empire. Roxana having given birth to a boy, the 
government was carried on in the name of the two insubordina- 
joint kings. Perdiccas' own office was that of vizier provincial 

or prime minister. The generals, who had received governors, 
provinces, were viewed by Perdiccas as mere governors entrusted 
with their administration, and answerable to the kings for it. He 
himself, as prime minister, undertook to give commands to the 
governors as to their courses of action. But he soon found that 
they declined to pay his commands any respect. The centrifugal 
force was greater than the centripetal; and the disintegration of 
the empire was not to be avoided. 

Leonnatus and Antigonus, required by Perdiccas to put Eumenes in pos- 
session of Cappadocia, make light of his orders. Antigonus does nothing. 
Leonnatus schemes to marry Cleopatra and supplant Antipater in Macedon ; 
but wishing first to put down the insurrection of the Greeks, he marches into 
Thessaly, where he falls. Ptolemy Lagi puts Cleomenes to death and acts as 
independent prince in Egypt. Perdiccas has to undertake the Cappadocian 
war in person, defeats Ariarathes, and instals Eumenes. In another part of 
the empire, Pithon plans to make himself independent by the help of those 
discontented colonists who had been settled by Alexander along his north- 
eastern frontier ; he is baulked, however, by the foresight and prompt cruelty 
of the vizier. 

5. It was probably the uncertainty of his actual position, and 
the difficulty of improving it without some violent step, that led 
Perdiccas to entertain the idea of removing the Ambition of 
kings, and himself seizing the empire. Though he Perdiccas. 
had married Nicaea, the daughter of Antipater, he the satraps 
arranged to repudiate her, and negotiated a marriage ^Z^'^^'^^ h™- 
with Cleopatra, Alexander's sister. Such a union would have 
given to his claims the colour of legitimacy. The opposition 
which he had chiefly to fear was that of his colleagues in the 
regency, Antipater and Craterus, and of the powerful satraps, 
Ptolemy Lagi and Antigonus. The former he hoped to cajole, 
while he crushed the latter. But his designs were penetrated., 
Antigonus fled to Macedonia, b. c. 323, and warned Craterus and 
Antipater of their danger. A league was made between them 
and Ptolemy ; and thus, in the war which followed, Perdiccas and 
his friend Eumenes were engaged on the one side against Anti- 
pater, Craterus, Antigonus, and Ptolemy Lagi on the other. 

P 2 



212 MACEDONIA. [book iv. 

6. Perdiccas, leaving Eumenes to defend Asia^ marched in 
person against Ptolemy. His army was from the first disaffected ; 

andj when the military operations with which he 
among the Commenced the campaign failed, they openly mu- 

' Successors,' tinied, attacked him, and slew him in his tent. 
B.C. 321. ' ' 

Death of Meanwhile Eumenes, remaining on the defensive 
Perdiccas. -^^ ^^^^ Minor, repulsed the assaults made upon him, 
defeated and slew Craterus, and made himself a great reputation. 

7. The removal of Perdiccas from the scene necessitated a new 
arrangement. Ptolemy declining the regency, it was conferred by 

, . , the army of Perdiccas on Pithon and Arrhidaeus, 

Antipater ■' _ ' 

sole regent, two of their generals, who with difficulty maintained 

^■^" ■ their position against the intrigues of Eurydice, the 

young wife of the mock monarch, Philip Arrhidaeus, until the 

arrival of Antipater in Syria, to whom they resigned their office. 

Antipater, now become sole regent, sile,nced Eurydice, and made 

a fresh division of the provinces at Triparadisus in Northern Syria, 

B.C. 320. 

By this division, while Ptolemy Lagi and Antigonus retained their old 
governments, Glitus received Lydia, and Arrhidaeus Mysia or the Hellespontine 
Phrygia; Seleucus was made satrap of Babylon, and Antigonus satrap of 
Susiana. The care and custody of the two kings was at first entrusted to 
Antigonus, but afterwards assumed by Antipater himself. To Antigonus was 
assigned the conduct of the war with Eumenes. Cassander, the son of Anti- 
pater, was made second in command under Antigonus, with the title of 
chiliarch, 

8. A war followed between Aiitigonus and Eumenes. Defeated 
in the open field through the treachery of Apollonides, whom Anti- 
Wars of gonus had bribed, Eumenes took refuge in the moun- 

Antigonus ^^In fastness of Nora, where he defended himself 

with ' 

Eumenes, Successfully against every attack for many months. 

Ptokmv°with Antigonus turned his arms against other so-called 

Laomedon. rebels, defeated them, and became master of the 

greater part of Asia Minor. Meanwhile, Ptolemy picked a quarrel 

with Laomedon, satrap of Syria, sent an army into his province, 

and annexed it. 

9. The death of the regent Antipater in Macedonia produced 
a further complication. Overlooking the claims of his son. 

Death of Cassander, he bequeathed the regency to his friend, 

Rr*enc*^^of *^^ ^S^^ Polysperchon, and thus drove Cassander 

Polysperchon. into Opposition. Cassander fled to Antigonus j and 

a league was formed between Ptolemy, Cassander, and Antigonus 



PEE. II.] SC/CCFSSOIiS OF ALEXANDER. 213 

on the one hand_, and Polysperchon and Eumenes on the other; 
the two latter defending the cause of unity and of the Macedonian 
monarchSj the three former that of disruption and of satrapial 
independence. 

TO. Antigonus began the war by absorbing Lydia and attacking 
Mysia. He was soon, however, called away to the East by the 
threatening attitude of Eumenes, who had collected . warofthe 
a force in Cilicia, with which he menaced Syria and Satraps against 
Phoenicia. The command of the sea, wliich Phoe- and Eumenes, 
nicia might have given, would have enabled Eumenes ^ ^• 

° ^ ' 319-316. 

and Polysperchon to unite their forces and act Death of 
together. It was the policy of Antigonus to prevent Eumenes. 
this. Accordingly, after defeating the royal fleet, commanded by 
Clitus, near Byzantium, he marched in person against Eumenes, 
who retreated before him, crossed the Euphrates and Tigris, and 
united his troops with those of a number of the Eastern satraps, 
whom he found leagued together to resist the aggressions of Seleucus 
and Pithon. Antigonus advanced to Susa, while Eumenes retreated 
into Persia Proper. Two battles were fought with little ad- 
vantage to either side; but at last the Macedonian jealousy of 
a foreigner and the insubordination of Alexander's veterans pre- 
vailed. Eumenes was seized by his own troops, delivered up to 
Antigonus, and put to death, B.C. 316. 

II. Meanwhile, in Europe, Cassander had proved fully capable 
of making head against Polysperchon. After counteracting the 
effect of Polysperchon's proceedings in Attica and Successes of 
the Peloponnese, he had marched into Macedonia, Cassander. 
where important changes had taken place among the members of 
the royal family. Eurydice, the young wife of Philip Arrhidaeus, 
had raised a party, and so alarmed Polysperchon for his own power 
that he had determined on making common cause with Olym- 
pias, who returned from Epirus to Macedon on his invitation. 
Eurydice found herself powerless in the presence of the more 
august princess, and, betaking herself to flight, was arrested, and, 
together with her husband, put to death by her rival, b. c. 317. 
But Cassander avenged her the next year. Entering Macedonia 
suddenly, he carried all before him, besieged Olympias in Pydna, 
and, though she surrendered on terms, allowed her to be killed 
by her enemies, Roxana and the young Alexander he held as 
prisoners, while he strengthened his title to the Macedonian 



214 -^'A CEDONIA . [book iv. 

throne by a marriage with Thessalonica, the daughter of King 
Philip. 

12. Thus the rebellious satraps had everywhere triumphed over 
the royalists^ and the Macedonian throne had fallen, though 

Ambition of Roxana and the young Alexander were still living. 

Antigonus. gut now the victors fell out among themselves. 

against him, Antigonus, after the death of Eumenes, had begun 
B.C. 315. |-Q |g|- ^^ {jg gggjj ^^2X nothing less than the entire 
empire of Alexander would content him. He slew Pithon, drove 
Ssleucus from Babylonia, and distributed the eastern provinces to 
his creatures. He then marched westward, where important 
changes had occurred during his JE^ence. Cassander had made 
himself complete master of Macede'tiia and Greece ; Lysimachus 
had firmly established himself in Thrace ; and Asander, satrap of 
Caria, had extended his dominion over Lycia and Cappadocia. 
These chiefs, fearing the ambition of Antigonus, entered into 
a league with Ptolemy Lagi and Seleuctis, now a fugitive at his 
court; and when the terms which they proposed were rejected, 
made preparations for war. 

13. The war of Antigonus against Ptolemy, Cassander, Seleucus, 
Asander (or the Carian Cassander), and Lysimachus lasted for 

.^. „, , three years. Antigonus had the assistance of his son 

First War of •' ^ r r-n 

Antigonus Demetrms in Asia, and (at first) of Polysperchon and 

Sata*^ his son Alexander in Europe. He was, on the whole, 

B. c. moderately successful in Syria. Asia Minor, and 

314 311 J J ■> 

Greece ; but the recovery of Babylonia by Seleucus, 

and the general adhesion to his cause of the Eastern provinces, 

more than counterbalanced these gains. 

Details of the "War. Antigonus, anxious to obtain the mastery of the sea, 
begins by attacking Syria and Phoenicia, B. c. 3 14. Ptolemy Lagi makes but a poor 
defence ; and the fall of Tyre, after a siege of fifteen months, places Phoenicia at 
Antigonus' disposal. At the same time, most of Asia Minor is recovered to 
Antigonus by his nephew, Ptolemy. Antigonus then, leaving Demetrius in 
Phoenicia, proceeds in person against Asander — B.C. 313 — and succeeds in 
crushing him. He menaces both Lysimachus and Cassander, but is recalled 
to Syria by the ill success of Demetrius, whom Ptolemy has defeated at Gaza, 
B.C. 312. This victory encourages Seleucus to attempt the recovery of 
Babylon. He marches thither and is well received, defeats Nicanor, governor 
of Media, and becomes master of Babylonia, Media, Susiana, and Persia. 
Demetrius is sent against him as soon as his successes are known; but he 
effects little and returns to his father. Meanwhile, Antigonus recovers Syria, 
but receives a check in an attempt against the Arabs of Petra. Cassander, on 
the whole, loses ground in Greece ; and the desire for a breathing space 
induces the greater number of the belligerents to consent to a peace in 
B.C. 311, which none of them intend to be lasting. 



PER. il] successors of ALEXANDER. 215 

14. The terms of the peace negotiated in b.c. 311 were, (i) That 
each should keep what he possessed ; (3) That the Greek cities 
should be independent ; (3) That Cassander should pga^^e of 
retain his power till the young Alexander came of ^- «• mil- 
age. Seleucus was no party to the treaty, and was not mentioned 
in it. It was probably thought that he could well hold his own j 
though, had he been seriously menaced, the treaty would have been 
at once thrown to the winds. As it was, only a few months 
passed before there was a renewal of hostilities. 

The murder of Roxana and the young Alexander by the orders of Cassander 
was a natural consequence of the third article of the treaty ; and was no doubt 
expected by Antigonus. He gladly saw these royal personages removed out 
of his way ; while it suited him that the odium of the act should attach to one 
of his adversaries. 

15. Hostilities re-commenced in the year following the treaty, 
B.C. 310. They were precipitated by the breach which took place 
between Antigonus and his nephew Ptolemy, who 

had been employed by him against Cassander in of Antigonus 
Greece. Ptolemy Lagi was the first to take up arms. ^Satraps^ 
Complaining that Antigonus had not withdrawn his b. c. 

310-301 

garrisons from the Greek cities of Asia Minor, he 
undertook to liberate them. Antigonus, on his side, complained 
that Cassander did not withdraw his garrisons from the cities of 
European Greece. Thus the war was renewed, nominally for the 
freedom of Greece. In reality, the contest was for supremacy on the 
part of Antigonus, for independence on that of the satraps ; and the 
only question with respect to Greece was, who should be her master. 

Details of the Struggle. Ptolemy ousts the garrisons of Antigonus from 
the maritime towns of Cilicia, but receives a check from Demetrius, B.C. 310. 
Polysperchon puts forward Hercules as heir to the Macedonian throne, but soon 
afterwards consents to his murder. Ptolemy assumes the oflFensive, crosses 
the ^gean, and occupies Sicyon and Corinth. A marriage is arranged between 
him and Cleopatra, Alexander's sister, the last survivor of the Macedonian 
royal house ; but Antigonus prevents it by having Cleopatra assassinated, 
B.C. 308. Demetrius restores Athens to a nominal freedom, B.C. 307. 
Adulation of the Athenians. Antigonus recalls Demetrius to Asia, and orders 
him to reduce Cyprus, which was now wholly under Ptolemy, B.C. 306. Siege 
of Salamis. Arrival of Ptolemy. Great sea-fight off Salamis, one of the most 
bloody in history. Defeat of Ptolemy, who escapes with only eight ships — 
17,000 prisoners taken. Antigonus now assumes the diadem and the royal title ; 
on which his example is followed by Ptolemy, Cassander, Lysimachus, and 
Seleucus. Attempt of Antigonus in the same year to reduce Egypt fails. 
Expedition of Demetrius against Rhodes, B.C. 305. Gallant defence of the 
Rhodians secures their neutrality. Demetrius henceforth known as Poliorcetes, 
' the Besieger.' During the absence of Demetrius in Rhodes, Cassander and 
Polysperchon had gained ground in Greece. As soon, therefore, as peace was 
made with the Rhodians, he crossed the iEgean, defeated Cassander, recovered 



2i6 MACEDONIA. [book iv. 

Boeotia and Attica, and re-entered Athens, where he passed the winter of 
B.C. 304 to 303 in gross debauchery and impiety. The next spring, B.C. 303, 
he invades the Peloponnese ; takes Sicyon and Corinth; recovers Achsea, 
Arcadia, and Argolis ; arranges affairs in Western Greece ; and prepares to 
invade Macedonia. Gassander and Lysimachus, perceiving their danger, 
concert measures and implore the aid of Seleucus and Ptolemy. "While Gas- 
sander meets Demetrius in Thessaly, Lysimachus invades Asia Minor, B.C. 302. 
Imprudent inaction of Demetrius. Lysimachus conquers Mysia, Lydia, and 
part of Phrygia ; but, when Antigonus advances to meet him, retreats into 
Bithynia, and there stands on the defensive. Antigonus summons Demetrius 
to his aid from Europe. Ptolemy recovers Syria, but does not venture to pro- 
ceed any further. Seleucus, at the head of all the forces of the East, advances 
from Babylon, and is allowed to effect a junction with Lysimachus. The 
combined armies give battle to Antigonus and Demetrius at Ipsus in Phrygia, 
and completely defeat them. Antigonus is slain. Demetrius escapes and takes 
refuge in Greece, but is not allowed to enter Athens. 

16. The conquerors at Ipsus, Seleucus and Lysimachus, divided 
the dominions of Alexander afresh. As was natural, they took to 

Division of themselves the lion's share. The greater part of 
the Empire Asia Minor was made over to Lysimachus. Seleucus 

3,1 tcr tflG 

Battle of received Cappadocia, part of Phrygia, Upper Syria, 
Ipsus. Mesopotamia, and the valley of the Euphrates. Cilicia 
was given to Cassander's brother, Pleistarchus. Neither Cassander 
himself nor Ptolemy received any additions to their dominions. 

17. War had now raged over most of the countries conquered 
by Alexander for the space of twenty years. The loss of lives and 

the consumption of treasure had been immense. 
condition of Greece, Asia Minor, Cyprus, and Syria, which had 
Greece and bggn the chief scenes of conflict, must have suffered 

the East at . ' 

the close of especially. Nowhere had there been much attempt 
e strugg e. ^^ organisation or internal improvements, the atten- 
tion of the rulers having been continually fixed on military affairs. 
Still, the evils of constant warfare had been, out of Greece at any 
rate, partly counterbalanced, (i) by the foundation of large and 
magnificent cities, intended partly as indications of the wealth 
and greatness of their founders, partly as memorials to hand down 
their names to after ages ; {2) by the habits of military discipline 
imparted to a certain number of the Asiatics; and (3) by the 
spread of the Greek language and of Greek ideas over most of 
Western Asia and North-Eastern Africa. The many dialects 
of Asia Minor died away and completely disappeared before the 
tongue of the conqueror ; which, even where it did not wholly 
oust the vernacular (as in Egypt, in Syria, and in Upper Asia), 
stood beside it and above it as the language of the ruling classes 
and of the educated, generally intelligible to such persons from 



PEK. III. PART I.] SELEUCIDuE. 217 

the shores of the Adriatic to the banks of the Indus, and from 
the Crimea to Elephantine. Knowledge rapidly progressed ; for not 
only did the native histories of Egypt, Babylon, Phoenicia, Judaea, 
and other eastern countries become now for the first time really 
known to the Greeks, but the philosophic thought and the accumu 
lated scientific stores of the most advanced Oriental nations were 
thrown open to them, and Greek intelligence was able to employ 
itself on materials of considerable value, which had hitherto been 
quite inaccessible. A great advance was made in the sciences of 
mathematics, astronomy, geography, ethology, and natural history, 
partly through this opening up of Oriental stores, partly through 
the enlarged acquaintance with the world and its phenomena 
which followed on the occupation by the Greeks of vast tracts 
previously untrodden by Europeans. Commerce, too, in spite of 
the unsettled state of the newly-occupied countries, extended its 
operations. On the other hand, upon Greece itself familiarity 
with Asiatic ideas and modes of life produced a debasing effect. 
The Oriental habits of servility and adulation superseded the old 
free-spoken independence and manliness ; patriotism and public 
spirit disappeared ; luxury increased ; literature lost its vigour ; art 
deteriorated ; and the people sank into a nation of pedants, para- 
sites, and adventurers. 

THIRD PERIOD. 

History of the States into which the Macedonian Monarchy was broken 
up after the Battle of Ipsus. 

PART I. 

History of the Syrian Kingdom of the Seleucidce, B.C. 312 to 65. 

Sources. The original authorities for the history of Syria during this 
period are two books (xix., xx.), and the fragments of several lost books, of 
DiODORUS (lib. xxi.-xxxiv.), the epitome of Justin, some books and fragments 
of PoLYBius (especially books v., vii., and viii.), the Syriaca of Appian, Livy 
(books xxxi. to xlv.), the Books of Maccabees, and the Antiquities of Josephus. 
None of these works contain a continuous or complete account of the whole 
period ; and the history has to be constructed by piecing together the different 
narratives. The chronology of the later kings depends mainly upon the dates 
which appear on their coins. 

Of modern works on the subject the most important are — 

Foy-Vaillant, J., Imperium Seleucidarum sive historia regum SyricB. Paris, 
1681 ; 4to. The 2nd edition, published at the Hague in 1732, is the best. 

FroeliCH, E., Annates compendiarii rerum et regum Syrice, numis veteribuT 
tllujtrati. Vienna, 1744 ; folio. A 2nd edition followed in 1754. 



2i8 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

Droysen, Geschichte der Nachfolger Alexander's des Grossen. Hamburg, 
1836-43 ; 2 vols, 8vo. 

The period has also been well treated by B. G. Niebuhr in his Vortrdge 
iiber alte Geschichte, vol. iii., Lectures 88-112. 

I. "Xhe kingdom of the Seleucidae was originally established in 
Inner Asia. It dates from the year b.c. 313, when its founder, 

F nd f n Seleucus Nicator, or ' the Conqueror,' taking advan- 
of the tage of the check which Antigonus had received by 

B^c^si^.' the victory of Ptolemy Lagi over Demetrius, near 
Reign of Gaza, returned to the province from which he had 
Seleucus. been a few years earlier expelled by his great adver- 
sary, and, re-establishing himself without much difficulty, assumed 
the diadem. At first, the kingdom consisted merely of Babylonia 
and the adjacent regions, Susiana, Media, and Persia j but, after 
the unsuccessful expedition of Demetrius (b.c. 311), the Oriental 
provinces generally submitted themselves, and within six years 
from the date of his return to Babylon, Seleucus was master of all 
the countries lying between the Indus and Euphrates on the one 
hand, the Jaxartes and the Indian Ocean on the other. 

3. Shortly afterwards he undertook a great campaign against 
Sandracottus (Chandragupta), an Indian monarch, who bore sway 

Expedition ^^ ^^^ region about the western head streams of the 
against India. Ganges. After a brief struggle, he concluded a peace 
with this powerful prince, who furnished him with 500 elephants, 
and threw India open to his traders. It is probable that he pur- 
chased the good-will of Sandracottus by ceding to him a portion of 
his own Indian possessions. 

3. In the year b.c. 303 Seleucus, whose aid had been invoked 
by Lysimachus and Cassander, set out from Babylon for Asia 

Battl f Minor, and, having wintered in Cappadocia, effected 
Ipsus, a junction with the forces of Lysimachus early in the 

B.C. 301. spring of b.c. 30T. The battle of Ipsus (see p. 316) 
followed. Antigonus was defeated and slain, and his dominions 
shared by his conquerors. To the kingdom of Seleucus were added 
Cappadocia, part of Phrygia, Upper Syria, and the right bank of 
the middle Euphrates. 

4. By this arrangement the territorial increase which the king- 
Enlargement dom received was not large • but the change in the 

of the kingdom, gg^^ Qf empire, which the accession of territory 
brought about, was extremely important. By shifting his capital 



PER. III. PART I.] SELEUCIDJE. 219 

from Babylonia to Syria, from the Lower Tigris to the Orontes, 
'^^' ^ Seleucus thought to strengthen himself against his 
of the capital rivals, Lysimachus and Ptolemy. He forgot, appa- 
to ntioc . j.gjj^iy^ ^2X by placing his capital at one extremity 
of his long kingdom he weakened it generally, and, in particular, 
loosened his grasp upon the more eastern provinces, which were the 
least Hellenised and the most liable to revolt. Had Babylon or 
Seleucia continued the seat of government, the East might probably 
have been retained- the kingdom of the Parthians might never 
have grown up. Rome, when she interfered in the affairs of 
Asia, would have found a great Greek Empire situated beyond the 
Euphrates, and so almost inaccessible to her arms j the two civili- 
sations would have co-existed, instead of being superseded the one 
by the other, and the history of Asia and of the world would have 
been widely different. 

The followers of Alexander inherited from their master a peculiar fondness 
for the building of new cities, which they called after themselves, their fathers, 
or their favourite wives. Cassander built Thessalonica on the bay of the 
name, and Gassandreia in the peninsula of Pallene. Lysimachus fixed his seat 
of government at a new town, which he called Lysimacheia, on the neck of 
the Chersonese. Antigonus was building Antigoneia, on the Orontes, when 
he fell at Ipsus. His son, Demetrius, made his capital Demetrias on the gulf 
of Pagasae. Seleucus, even before he transferred the seat of government to 
Antioch, had removed it from Babylon to his city of Seleucia, on the Tigris. 
Ptolemy alone maintained the capital which he found established on his 
arrival in Egypt. The numerous Antiochs, Laodiceias, Epiphaneias, and 
Seleuceias, with which Asia became covered, attest the continuance of the 
taste in the successors of Nicator. 

5. Though Seleucus had come to the rescue, on the invitation 
of Ptolemy, Cassander, and Lysimachus, yet he was well aware 
that he could place no dependence on the continu- 
ance of their amity. His success made them jealous Seleucus with 
of him, and induced them to draw nearer to each Demetrius, 

B c 299 

Other, and unite their interests by inter-marriages. 
Seleucus, therefore, cast about for an ally, and found one in 
Demetrius, the son of Antigonus, his late adversary, whom he 
attached to himself in the same way. Demetrius, who had 
escaped from Ipsus with a considerable force, was a personage of 
importance ; and, by supporting him in his quarrels with Cas- 
sander, and then Lysimachus, Seleucus was able to keep those 
princes employed. 

Marriage of Lysimachus with Arsinoe, daughter of Ptolemy Lagi, b.c. 301. 
Of Seleucus with Stratonice, daughter of Demetrius, B.C. 299. Of Antipater, 
second son of Cassander, with Eurydice, daughter of Lysimachus ; and of 
Alexander, Cassander's third son, with Lysandra, daughter of Ptolemy, soon 



2 20 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

afterwards. Attempt at a match between Demetrius and Ptolemais, daughter 
of Ptolemy, furthered by Seleucus, who seems to have been at this time really 
desirous of peace. Marriage of Lysandra, after Alexander's death, with 
Agathocles, the eldest son of Lysimachus. 

6. In Asia a period of tranquillity followed the marriage of 
Seleucus. Cassander and Lysimachus were occupied with wars 

in Europe raised by the ambition of Demetrius. 

period. Ptolemy by himself was too weak to effect anything. 

Organisation ^j^j having been allowed to retain Lower Syria and 

of the empire. ^ o j 

Palestine, had no ground of complaint. Seleucus 
employed the interval (about twelve years, b.c. 399 to 287) in 
building his capital, Antioch ; enlarging and beautifying its port, 
Seleuceia; and consolidating, arranging, and organising his vast 
empire. The whole territory was divided into seventy-two 
satrapies, which were placed under the government of Greeks or 
Macedonians, not of natives. A large standing army was main- 
tained, composed mainly of native trpops, officered by Mace- 
donians or Greeks. After a while, Seleucus divided his empire 
with his son Antiochus, committing to him the entire government 
of all the provinces beyond the Euphrates — a dangerous precedent, 
though one which can scarcely be said to have had actual evil 
consequences. At the same time, Seleucus yielded to Antiochus 
the possession of his consort, Stratonice, with whom that prince 
had fallen desperately in love. 

7. The first disturbance of the tranquillity was caused by the 
wild projects of Demetrius. That hare-brained prince, after 

Invasion of g^-^^i^g ^'^'^ ^tri losing Macedonia, plunged sud- 
Asiaby denly into Asia, where he hoped to win by his 

Demetrius 

B.C. 287.' sword a new dominion. Unable to make any 

His death, scrious impression on the kingdom of Lysimachus, 

he entered Cilicia and became engaged in hostilities with Seleucus, 

who defeated him, took him prisoner, and kept him in a private 

condition for the rest of his life. 

8. Shortly afterwards, b.c. 381, occurred the rupture between 
Seleucus and Lysimachus, which led to the death of that aged 

Rupture with monarch and the conquest of great part of his 
Lysimachus. dominions. Domestic troubles, caused by Arsinoe, 

Conquest of 5/3 

Asia Minor, paved the way for the attack of Seleucus, who found 

Murder of ^^^ ^^^^ Support in the disaffection of his enemy's 

Seleucus. subjects. The battle of Corupedion cost Lysimachus 

his life J and gave the whole of Asia Minor into the hands 



PEE. III. PAET I.] SELEUCID^. 221 

of the Syrian king. It might have been expected that the 
European provinces would have been gained with equal ease, 
and that, with the exception of Egypt, the scattered fragments 
of Alexander's empire would have been once more re-united. 
But an avenger of Lysimachus appeared in the person of the 
Egyptian exile, Ptolemy Ceraunus, the eldest son of Ptolemy 
Lagi ; and as Seleucus was proceeding to take possession 
of Lysimacheia, his late rival's capital, he was murdered in 
open day by the Egyptian adventurer, who thereupon became 
king of Macedon. 

9. Antiochus I (Soter) succeeded to his father's dominions, 
B. c. 280, and shortly became engaged in hostilities with Zipcetes 
and Nicomedes, native kings of Bithynia, the former Reien of 

of whom had successfully maintained his indepen- Antiochus I 
dence against Lysimachus. Nicomedes (b.c. 278), b.c 

finding his own resources insufficient for the struggle, 280-261. 
availed himself of the assistance of the Gauls, who had been now 
for some years ravaging Eastern Europe, and had already aided him 
against his brother Zipoetes. With their help he maintained his 
independence, and crippled the power of Antiochus, who lost 
Northern Phrygia, which was occupied by the Gauls and became 
Galatia, and North- Western Lydia, which became the kingdom of 
Pergamus. Antiochus succeeded in inflicting one considerable 
defeat on the Gauls, b.c. 375, whence his cognomen of '^ Soter' 
(Saviour)^ otherwise his expeditions were unfortunate; and the 
Syrian empire at his death had declined considerably below the 
point of greatness and splendour reached under Nicator. 

Unsuccessful expedition against Egypt, B.C. 264, undertaken to support the 
rebel king of Gyrene, Magas, who had espoused Apame, a daughter of 
Antiochus. Failure of an attempt to recover Pergamus, B.C. 263. Antiochus 
defeated near Sardis by Eumenes. Defeat and death of Antiochus in a battle 
with the Gauls near Ephesus, B.C. 261. 

10. Antiochus II, surnamed ©eo's, 'the God,' succeeded his 
father. He was a weak and effeminate prince, sunk in sensuality 
and profligacy, who allowed the kingdom to be ruled j^^j^^^ ^j 
by his wives and male favourites. Under him the Antiochus II 
decline of the empire became rapid. The weakness b.^o!^ 

of his government tempted the provinces to febel • 261-246. 
and the Parthian and Bactrian kingdoms date from his reign. 
The only success which attended him was in his war with Egypt, 



22 2 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

at the close of which he recovered what he had previously lost to 
Philadelphus in Asia Minor. 

Details of this Reign. Marriage of Antiochus with Laodice, daughter of 
Achseus. Her influence, and that of his sister Apame, wife of Magas, engage 
him in a war with Ptolemy Philadelphus, B.C. 260, which is terminated, 
B. c. 252, by a marriage between AntiocTius and Berenice, Ptolemy's daughter. 
Soon after the close of this war, B.C. 255, Parthia and Bactria revolt and 
establish their independence. On the death of Philadelphus, B.C. 247, Antio- 
chus repudiates Berenice and takes back his former wife Laodice, who, 
however, doubtful of his constancy, murders him to secure the throne for her 
son Seleucus, B.C. 246, 

II. Seleucus 11, surnamed Callinicus^ became king on the 

assassination of his father. Throughout his reign, which lasted 

Reign of rather more than twenty years, b.c. 246 to 236, 

Seleucus II hg was most unfortunate, being engaged in wars 

(Callinicus), . , „ , t^ . , * ^ , 

B.C. with Ptolemy huergetes, with Antiochus Hierax, 

246-226. ]^jg Q^jj brother, and with the Parthian king, 
Arsaces II, in all of which he met with disasters. Still, it is 
remarkable that, even when his fortunes were at the lowest ebb, 
he always found a means of recovering himself, so that his epithet 
of Callinicus, 'the Victorious,' was not wholly inappropriate. 
The kingdom must have been greatly weakened and exhausted 
during his reign ; but its limits were not seriously contracted. 
Portions of Asia Minor were indeed lost to Ptolemy and to 
Attalus, and the Parthians appear to have made themselves 
masters of Hyrcania; but, excepting in these two quarters, 
Seleucus recovered his losses and left the territories which he had 
inherited to his son, Seleucus Ceraunus. 

Ptolemy Euergetes invades Syria, B.C. 245, to avenge the murder of his 
sister, Berenice, and her infant son, who had been put to death by Laodice, with 
the consent of Callinicus. In the war which follows, he carries everything 
before him. All Asia within the Euphrates, excepting some parts of Lydia 
and Phrygia, submits to him. He then proceeds across the Euphrates, and 
adds to his dominion Mesopotamia, Babylonia, Susiana, Media, and Persia. 
His exactions, however, make him unpopular ; and on the occurrence of 
a revolt in Egypt he loses almost all his conquests. Callinicus once more 
rules from the Indus to the -Sgean. But an intestine war is soon after- 
wards provoked by the ambition of his brother. Antiochus, surnamed 
Hierax, 'the Hawk,' at the age of fourteen revolts against Callinicus, and, 
aided by his uncle Andromachus and a body of Gallic mercenaries, obtains 
important successes. Meanwhile, the Parthians had gained advantages in Upper 
Asia, and Callinicus undertook an expedition against them, about B.C. 237, 
but was defeated in a great battle. The war between the brothers was 
then renewed, and continued till B.C. 229, when Antiochus was completely 
defeated and became a fugitive. It was probably during this contest that 
Attalus became master of most of Asia Minor. Seleucus died through a fall 
from his horse, B.C. 226. 



PEE. III. PAET I.] SELEUCID^. 223 

12. Seleucus III — surnamed Ceraunus, 'the Thunderbolt' — 
had a reign which lasted only three years. Assisted by his cousin, 
the younger Achaeus^ he prepared a great expedition . 

against the Pergamene monarch, Attains, whose Seleucus III 
dominions now reached to the Taurus. His ill-paid (Ceraunus). 
army, however_, while on the march, became mutinous ; and he was 
assassinated by some of his officers^ b.c. 323. 

13. On the death of Seleucus III^ Antiochus III^ surnamed 'the 
Great,' ascended the throne. His long reign, which exceeded 
thirty-six years, constitutes the most eventful period ^^j™ ^f 
of Syrian history. Antiochus did much to recover, Antiochus III 

,. , , . , , . (the Great), 

consondate, and in some quarters enlarge, his em- b.c. 

pire. He put down the important rebellions of 223-187. 
Molo and Achseus, checked the progress of the Parthians and 
Bactrians, restored his frontier towards India, drove the Egyptians 
from Asia, and even at one time established his dominion over 
a portion of Europe. But these successes were more than counter- 
balanced by the losses which he sustained in his war with the 
Romans, whom he needlessly drew into Asia. The alliance 
between Rome and Pergamus, and the consequent aggrandisement 
of that kingdom, were deeply injurious to Syria, and greatly 
accelerated her decline. Antiochus was unwise to provoke the 
hostility of the Romans, and foolish, when he had provoked it, 
not to take the advice of Hannibal as to the mode in which the 
war should be conducted. Had he united with Macedonia and 
Carthage, and transferred the contest into Italy, the Roman power 
might have been broken or checked. By standing alone, and on 
the defensive, he at once made his defeat certain, and rendered 
its consequences more injurious than they would have been 
otherwise. 

Details of this Reign. At first, the cruel and crafty Garian, Hermeias, 
is all-powerful with the young prince. At his instigation Antiochus makes 
war upon Egypt, B.C. 223, while he sends his generals to put down the revolt 
of Molo. When his generals, however, are defeated, he proceeds in person 
against the rebels, defeats and crushes them, B.C. 220, makes a successful 
expedition into Atropatene, and, having caused Hermeias to be put to death, 
returns in triumph to Syria. Achaeus during his absence had assumed the 
diadem and the title of king. Antiochus remonstrates, but does not march 
against his rebellious relation, preferring to resume his schemes against Egypt. 
An important war follows with Ptolemy Philopator, B.C. 219, in which 
Antiochus is at first completely successful ; but the battle of Raphia, B.C. 217, 
deprives him of all his conquests, except the maritime Seleuceia, which he 
retains. Antiochus, having made peace with Egypt, turns his arms next 
against Achseus, B.C. 216, and, assisted by Attains, defeats him, besieges him 



2 24 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

in Sardis, and finally obtains possession of his person by treachery, B.C. 214. 
War then followed with Parthia, which had assumed an aggressive attitude 
under Arsaces III, and was threatening Media. Antiochus led his army 
from Ecbatana across the desert to Hecatompylos, the capital of Parthia, 
which he took, B.C. 213, and then crossed the mountains into Hyrcania, 
where a battle seems to have been fought, the issue of which was so far 
doubtful that Antiochus was induced to make peace with Arsaces, allowing 
him the title of king, and confirming him in the possession of Parthia and 
Hyrcania. He then turned his arms against Bactria ; but, after gaining 
certain advantages, he admitted Euthydemus also, the Bactrian king, to terms, 
negotiated a marriage between one of his daughters and Demetrius, the king's 
son, and left him in possession of Bactria and Sogdiana. He then crossed the 
Hindoo Koosh into Affghanistan and renewed the old Syrian alliance with the 
Indian kingdom of those parts, which was now ruled by a monarch who 
is called Sophagasenus. Finally, Antiochus returned home through Arachosia, 
Drangiana, and Garmania (Gandahar, Seistan, and Kerman), where he win- 
tered, and from which he undertook a naval expedition against the Arabs 
on the west shore of the Persian Gulf, whom he punished for their piracies. 

Return of Antiochus from the East, B.C. 205, and resumption of his 
Egyptian projects. A treaty is made with Phihp of Macedon for the partition 
of the kingdom of the Ptolemies between the two powers. War in Goele- 
Syria, Phoenicia, and Palestine, with varied success, terminated by a great 
victory over Scopas near Panias, B.C. 198. Marriage of Cleopatra, daughter 
of Antiochus, with Ptolemy V (Epiphanes). Gcel^-Syria and Palestine pro- 
mised as a dowry, but not delivered. 

The conquests of Antiochus in Asia Minor and Europe, B.C. 197 to 196, 
bring him into contact with the Romans, who require him to evacuate the 
Chersonese and restore the Greek cities in Asia Minor to freedom. He 
indignantly rejects their demands, and prepares for war. Flight of Hannibal 
to his court, B.C. 195. Antiochus makes alliance with the jEtolians, and 
in B.C. 192 crosses into Greece, lands at Demetrias, and takes Ghalcis. Great 
battle at Thermopylae between the Romans, under Acilius Glabrio, and the 
allied forces of Antiochus and the iEtolians, Antiochus, completely defeated, 
quits Europe and returns to Asia, B.C. 191. His fleet has orders to protect 
the shores and prevent the Romans from landing. But the battle of Corycus 
ruins these hopes. The Romans obt^tin the mastery of the sea ; and their 
army, having crossed the Hellespont without opposition, gains under the two 
Scipios the great victory of Magnesia, which places Antiochus at their mercy, 
B.C. 190. He purchases peace by ceding all Asia Minor except Cilicia, and 
by consenting to pay a contribution of 1 2,000 talents. The ceded provinces 
are added by the Romans to the kingdom of Pergamus, which is thus raised 
into a rival to Syria. 

The defeat of Magnesia is followed by the revolt of Armenia, B.C. 189, 
which henceforth becomes independent. It leads also to the death of An- 
tiochus, who, in order to pay the war contribution imposed upon him by the 
Romans, is driven to the plunder of the Oriental temples. Hence a tumult 
in Elymais, wherein the king is killed, B.C. 187. 

14. Antiochus was succeeded by his son, Seleucus IV, who took 

the name of Philopator, and reigned eleven years. B.C. 187 to 176. 

Reign of This period was wholly uneventful. The fear of 

Seleucus IV Rome, and the weakness produced by exhaustion, 

B. c. ' forced Seleucus to remain quiet, even when Eumenes 

187-176. Qf Pergamus seemed about to conquer and absorb 

Pontus. Rome held as a hostage for his fidelity, first, his brother. 



FEB. III. PART I.] SELEUCID^. 225 

Antiochus, and then his son, Demetrius^ (the offspring of his 
marriage with Laodice, his sister. Seleucus was murdered by 
Heliodorus, his treasurer (b.c. 176), who hoped to succeed to his 
dominions. 

15. On the death of Seleucus, the throne was seized by Helio- 
dorus ; but it was not long before Antiochus, the brother of the 
late king, with the help of the Pergamene monarch, j^eign of 
Eumenes, recovered it. This prince, who is known Antiochus iv 

, . A • I TTT / IV (Epiphanes), 

m history as Antiochus iV_, or (more commonly) b.c. 

as Antiochus Epiphanes, was a man of courage and 176-164. 
energy. He engaged in important wars with Armenia and Egypt ; 
and would beyond a doubt have conquered the latter country, had 
it not been for the interposition of the Romans. Still, the energy 
of Epiphanes was of little benefit to his country. He gained no 
permanent advantage from his Egyptian campaigns, since the 
Romans deprived him even of Cyprus. He made no serious 
impression on Armenia, though he captured Artaxias, its sovereign. 
On the other hand, his religious intolerance raised him up an 
enemy in the heart of his empire, whose bitter hostility proved 
under his successors a prolific source of weakness. The Jews, 
favoured by former kings of Syria, were driven to desperation by 
the mad project of this self-willed monarch, who, not content with 
plundering the Temple to satisfy his necessities, profaned it by 
setting up in the Holy of Holies the image of Jupiter Olympius. 
His luxury and extravagance also tended to ruin his empire, 
and made him seek to enrich himself with the plunder of other 
temples besides that at Jerusalem. An attempt of this kind, 
which was baffled, in Elymai's_, is said to have been followed by 
an access of superstitious terror, which led to his death at Tabae, 
B.C. 164. 

Details of this Reign. Antiochus, assisted by Eumenes, drives out 
Heliodorus, and obtains the throne, B.C. 176, He astonishes his subjects by 
an affectation of Roman manners. His good-natured profuseness. Threat- 
ened with war by the ministers of Ptolemy Philometor, who claim Coele-Syria 
and Palestine as the dowry of Cleopatra, the late queen-mother, Antiochus 
marches against Egypt, and in four campaigns — B. c. 171 to 168 — reduces it to 
such straits, that the aid of Rome is invoked, and Antiochus is haughtily 
required by Popilhus to relinquish forthwith all his conquests. He obeys 
unwillingly, and vents his rage by cruelties on the Jews, whose temple he 
plunders and desecrates. After this we find him holding a magnificent festival 
at Daphne, which is attended by thousands from all parts of Greece, B.C. 166. 
His expedition against Armenia and capture of Artaxias probably took place 
in the next year, B.C. 165, and in the year following, B.C. 164, he died, 
as above stated, at Tabae. 

Q 



2 26 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

1 6. Epiphanes was succeeded by Antiochus V, surnamed Eupa- 

tor, a boy not more than twelve years old. The chief power 

Reign of during his reign was in the hands of Lysias, whom 

Antiochus V Epiphanes had left as regent when he quitted An- 

(Eupator), .5^. n i,it 

B.C. tioch. Lysias attempts to reduce the rebel Jews, 

164-162. {jy^ allows himself to be diverted from the war by 

the attitude of his rival Philip, whom he attacks, defeats and puts 

to death. He takes no steps, however, to resist the Parthians 

when they over-run the eastern provinces, or the Romans when 

they harshly enforce the terms of the treaty concluded after the 

battle of Magnesia. The position of affairs, which we can well 

understand the Romans favouring, was most injurious to the 

power of Syria, which, in the hands of a minor and a regent, was 

equally incapable of maintaining internal order and repelling 

foreign attack. It was an advantage to Syria when Demetrius, 

the adult son of Seleucus Philopator, escaped from Rome, where 

he had been long detained as a hostage, and, putting Lysias and 

Eupator to death, himself mounted the throne. 

The war between Lysias and Philip, which allowed the Parthians to spread 
unresisted over the fairest of the eastern provinces, was caused by the im- 
prudence of Epiphanes, who had left his young son, Antiochus, to the care 
of Lysias on quitting Antioch, but upon his death -bed appointed a new 
guardian in the person of Philip, Philip, who had the support of a part of the 
army, seized Antioch, where he was defeated and slain, B. c. 162. 

17. Demetrius, having succeeded in obtaining the sanction 

of Rome to his usurpation, occupied himself for some years in 

Reign of attempts to reduce the Jews. He appears to have 

Demetrius I been a vigorous administrator, and a man of con- 
B. c. ' siderable ambition and energy ; but he could not 

162-151. arrest the decline of the Syrian state. The Romans 
compelled him to desist from his attacks on the Jews ; and when 
he ventured on an expedition into Cappadocia, for the purpose 
of expelling the king Ariarathes, and giving the crown to 
Orophernes, his bastard brother, a league was formed against him 
by the neighbouring kings, to which the Romans became parties j 
and a pretender, Alexander Balas, an illegitimate son of Epiphanes, 
was encouraged to come forward and claim the throne. So low 
had the Syrian power now sunk, that both Demetrius and his rival 
courted the favour of the despised Jews ^ and their adhesion to 
the cause of the pretender probably turned the scale in his favour. 
After two years of warfare and two important battles, Demetrius 
was defeated and lost both his crown and life. 



PER. III. PAiiT I.J SELEUCID^. 227 

The friendship of Demetrius with the historian Polybius gives an interest to 
his reign which the Syrian history rarely possesses. Polybius advised and aided 
his escape from Rome, and records its circumstances with great minuteness. 
We have more details too of this king's private character and tastes than of 
most others. It appears that he was addicted to hunting (whence the symbols 
on his coins), and was also an intemperate drinker. 

18. Alexander Balas, who had been supported in his struggle 
with Demetrius by the kings of Pergamus and Egypt, was given 
by the latter the hand of Cleopatra, his daughter. Reign of 
But he soon proved himself unfit to rule. Commit- ^Baks^*^"^ 
ting the management of affairs to an unworthy b.c. isi-mg. 
favourite, Ammonius, he gave himself up to every kind of self- 
indulgence. Upon this, Demetrius, the eldest son of the late 
king, perceiving that Balas had become odious to his subjects, took 
heart, and, landing in Cilicia, commenced a struggle for the throne. 
The fidelity of the Jews protected Alexander for a while ; but when 
his father-in-law, Ptolemy Philometor, passed over to the side of his 
antagonist, the contest was decided against him. Defeated in a 
pitched battle near Antioch, he fled to Abse in Arabia, where he 
was assassinated by his own officers, who sent his head to Ptolemy. 

19. Demetrius II, surnamed Nicator, then ascended the throne. 
He had already, while pretender, married Cleopatra, the wife of 
his rival, whom Ptolemy had forced Balas to give up. Y\x%t reign of 
On obtaining full possession of the kingdom, he Demetrius II 

• ,, , ,. 1 ^, . , ? (Nicator), 

ruled tyrannically, and disgusted many of his subjects. b.c. 

The people of Antioch having risen in revolt, and 146-140. 
Demetrius having allowed his Jewish body-guard to plunder the 
town, Diodotus of Apamea set up -a rival king in the person of 
Antiochus VI, son of Alexander Balas, a child of two years of age, 
who bore the regal title for three or four years (b.c. 146 to 143), 
after which Diodotus removed him, and, taking the name of 
Trypho, declared himself independent monarch (avTOKpccTap). After 
vain efforts to reduce his rivals for the space of about seven years, 
Demetrius, leaving his wife, Cleopatra, to maintain his interests 
in Syria, marched into his eastern provinces, which were in danger 
of falling a prey to the Parthians. Here, though at first he gained 
such advantages as enabled him to assume the title of ' Conqueror ' 
(I'lKarcop), his arms soon met with a reverse. Defeated by the 
Parthian monarch, Arsaces VI, in the year b.c. 140, he was taken 
prisoner, and remained a captive at the Parthian court for several 
years. 

Q 2 



2 28 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

The acknowledgment of Jewish independence by Demetrius shortly before 
his expedition to the East, B.C. 142, was an event of some importance in the 
history of the Jewish nation. Though it may be true that at a later period 
they again fell under the dominion of the Syrian kings, yet it seems certain 
that they dated their independence from the grant of Demetrius. 

20. During the absence of Demetrius in the remote East, his 
wife, Cleopatra, unable to make head against Tryphon, looked out 

Reign of ^^^ some effectual support, and found it in Antiochus 
Antiochus VII of Sida (Sidetes), her husband's brother, who, joining 
B.C. ' his arms with hers, attacked Tryphon, and after a 
137-129. struggle, which seems to have lasted nearly two years, 
defeated him and put him to death. Antiochus Sidetes upon this 
became sole monarch of Syria, b. c. 137, and contracted a mar- 
riage with Cleopatra, his captive brother's wife, who considered 
herself practically divorced by her husband's captivity and marriage 
with a Parthian princess. His first step, after establishing his 
authority, was to reduce the Jews, b.c. 135 to 133. A few years 
later, b.c. 129, he undertook an expedition into Parthia for the 
purpose of delivering his brother, and gained some important suc- 
cesses; but was finally defeated by the Parthian monarch, who 
attacked his army in its winter quarters, and destroyed it with its 
commander. 

21. Meanwhile Demetrius II, having been released from capti- 
vity by the Parthian monarch, who hoped by exciting troubles in 

Second Syria to force Antiochus to retreat, had reached 
reign of Antioch and recovered his former kingdom. But 

Demetrius II, , ^1 . , . .,,. 

B.C. he was not suffered to remain long in tranquillity. 

129-126. Ptolemy Physcon, the king of Egypt, raised up a 
pretender to his crown in the person of Alexander Zabinas, who 
professed to be the son of Balas. A battle was fought between 
the rivals near Damascus, in which Demetrius was completely 
defeated. Forced to take flight, he sought a refuge with his wife at 
Ptolema'is, but was rejected j whereupon he endeavoured to throw 
himself into Tyre, but was captured and slain, b.c. 126. 

22. War followed between Zabinas and Cleopatra, who, having 
Parallel rei ns P^^^ ^° death Seleucus, her eldest son, because he had 

of Alexander II assumed the diadem without her permission, asso- 

AntiochuTvill ciated with herself on the throne her second son, 

(Grypus), Antiochus, and reigned conjointly with him till b.c. 

121. Zabinas maintained himself in parts of Syria 

for seven years j but, having quarrelled with his patron, Ptolemy 



PEB. III. PAKT I.] SELEUCIDJE. 229 

Physcon, he was reduced to straits, about b.c. 124, and two years 
afterwards was completely crushed by Antiochus, who forced him 
to swallow poison, b.c. 122. Soon afterwards — e.g. 121 — Anti- 
ochus found himself under the necessity of putting his mother to 
death in order to secure his own life, against which he discovered 
her to be plotting. 

23. Syria now enjoyed a period of tranquillity under Antiochus 
VIII, for the space of eight years, b.c. 122 to 114. The eastern 
provinces were, however, completely lost, and no Sole reign of 
attempt was made to recover them. The Syrian Antiochus Vlll, 
kingdom was confined within Taurus on the north, 122-114. 
the Euphrates on the east^ and Palestine on the south. Judaea had 
become wholly independent. The great empire, which had once 
reached from Phrygia to the Indus, had shrunk to the dimensions of 
a province ; and there was no spirit in either prince or people to 
make any effort to regain what had been lost. The country was 
exhausted by the constant wars, the pillage of the soldiers, and the 
rapacity of the monarchs. Wealth was accumulated in a few 
hands. The people of the capital were wholly given up to luxury. 
If Rome had chosen to step in at any time after the death of the 
second Demetrius, she might have become mistress of the whole 
of Syria almost without a struggle. At first her domestic troubles, 
and then her contest with Mithridates, hindered her, so that it was 
not till half a century later that the miseries of Syria were ended 
by her absorption into the Roman empire. 

24. The tranquillity of Antiochus VIII was disturbed in b.c, 114 
by the revolt of his half-brother, Antiochus Cyzicenus, the son of 
Cleopatra by Antiochus Sidetes, her third husband. Revolt of 

A bloody contest followed, which it was attempted cyzicenus 
to terminate at the close of three years, b.c. hi. Parallel reigns 
by a partition of the territory. But the feud soon °andGrypusf 
broke out afresh. War raged between the brothers s- °- ii4-96. 
for nine years, b.c. 105 to 96, with varied success, but with no 
decided advantage to either, while the disintegration of the empire 
rapidly proceeded. The towns on the coast. Tyre, Sidon, Seleuceia, 
assumed independence. Cilicia revolted. The Arabs ravaged 
Syria on the one hand and the Egyptians on the other. At length, 
amid these various calamities, the reign of Antiochus VIII came to 
an end by his assassination, in b. c. 96, by Heracleon, an officer of 
his court. 



2 30 ' MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book i v. 

35. Heracleon endeavoured to seize the crown, but failed. It 

fell to Seleucus V (Epiphanes), the eldest son of Grypus, who 

T, - r continued the war with Antiochus Cyzicenus, and 

Reign of •' ' 

Seleucus V brought it to a successful issue in the second year 
^ ^B a of liis reign, B.C. 95, when Cyzicenus, defeated in a 

96-95. great battle, slew himself to prevent his capture. 
But the struggle between the two houses was not yet ended. 
Antiochus Eusebes, the son of Cyzicenus, assumed the royal title, 
and attacking Seleucus drove him out of Syria into Ciiicia, where 
he perished miserably^ being burnt alive by the people of Mopsu- 
estia, from whom he had required a contribution. 

26. Philip, the second son of Antiochus Grypus, succeeded, and 

carried on the war with Eusebes for some years, in conjunction 

Reiras of ^^"^ ^^^ brothers, Demetrius, and Antiochus Dio- 

Phiiip and nysus, until at last Eusebes was overcome and forced 

igranes, ^^ ^^^ refuge in Parthia. Philip and his brothers 

95-69. ^j^gj^ fgii Qu^^ 2sA engaged in war one against another. 

At length the Syrians, seeing no end to these civil contests, called 

to their aid the king of the neighbouring Armenia, Tigranes, and 

putting themselves under his rule, obtained a respite from suffering 

for about fourteen years, B.C. 83 to 69. At the close of this period, 

Tigranes, having mixed himself up in the Mithridatic war, was 

defeated by the Romans^ and forced to relinquish Syria. 

37. The Syrian throne seems then to have fallen to Antiochus 

j^gi^jj of Asiaticus, the son. of Eusebes, who held it for 

Antiochus four years only, when he was dispossessed by 

B.C. ' Pompey, and the remnant of the kingdom of the 

69-65. Seleucidae was reduced into the form of a Roman 

province, b.c. 65. 

PART II. 

History of the Egyptian Kingdom of the Ptolemies, B.C. 323 to 30. 

Sources. The sources for the Egyptian history of this period are for the 
most part identical with those which have been mentioned at the head of the 
last section (pp. 217-18) as sources for the history of the Seleucidse ; but on the 
whole they are scantier and less satisfactory. As the contact between Judaea 
and Egypt during this period was only occasional, the information furnished 
by JosEPHUS and the BooJis of Maccabees is discontinuous and fragmentary. 
Again, there is no work on Egypt corresponding to the Syriaca of Appian. 
The chronology, moreover, is in confusion, owing to the fact that the 
Ptolemies adopted no era, only dating their coins in some instances by their 
regnal years; so that the exactness which an era furnishes is wanting. 
Some important details with respect to foreign conquests and to the internal 



PEE. III. PART II.] PTOLEMIES. 231 

administration ai-e, however, preserved to us in Inscriptions, of vi'hich the 
chief are — 

The Inscription of Adule, seen by Cosmas Indopleusta, about a. d. 520, 
and preserved to us in his work, which Montfaucon has edited in his 
Collectio nova patrum et scriptorum GrcEcorum. Paris, 1706; 2 vols, folio. 
The inscription itself was first published by Leo Allatius in a small pamphlet 
entitled Ptolemcei Euergetis monumentum Adulitanum. Romae, 163 1. It has 
since been edited by Fabricius in his Bibliotheca Grceca, vol. ii. ; by Chishull 
in his Antiquitates Asiaticce (London, 1728; folio); by BoECKH in his Corpus 
Inscriptionum Graecarum, vol. iii, and by others. Mr. Salt was the first to 
point out that it consisted of two entirely distinct documents belonging 
to very different ages. (See his Narrati've in Lord Valentia's Voyages and 
Travels to India., Ceylon, &c. London, 1809 ; 3 vols. 4to.) This conclusion 
has since been adopted by Niebuhr, Heeren, Letronne, Boeckh, and 
most scholars. 

The Rosetta Stone, interesting not merely as a key to the decipherment 
of the hieroglyphics, but also as a document throwing considerable light on the 
internal administration of Egypt. The stone itself is in the British Museum. 
The inscription, which belongs to about the year B.C. 196 or 197, has been 
carefully edited by several scholars, among whom may be noticed especially — 

AmeilhON, Eclairctssemens sur I'inscription Grecque du monument trouve 
a Rosette. Paris, 1803 ; 8vo. 

Letronne, Inscription Grecque de Rosette ; texte et traduction litterale, accom- 
pagnee d^un commentaire critique, historique, et archeologiqiie. Paris, 1841 ; 8vo. 

Boeckh, in his Corpus Inscriptionum Gracarum, vol. iii. pp. 334-342. 

Among modern works on the history of Egypt under the Ptolemies the 
most important are — 

Foy-Vaillant, Historia Ptolemceorum j^gypti regum ad Jidem numismatum 
accommodata. Amstel. 1701 ; folio. 

ChampollION-FigEAC, Annales des Lagides, ou Chronologie des Rois Grecs 
d'Egypte, successeurs d' Alexandre le Grand. Paris, 1819 ; 2 vols. 8vo. 

Letronne, Recherches pour servir a Vhistoire de V Egypte pendant la domination 
des Grecs et des Romains, tirees des inscriptions Grecques et Latines, relatives a la 
chronologie, a Vet at des arts, aux usages civiles et religieux de ce pays. Paris, 
1828 ; 8vo. 

The subject is also treated, in connection with the other history of the 
time, by Droysen, in his Geschichte der Nachfolger Alexanders (supra, p. 209) ; 
and by Niebuhr in his Fortrage Uber alte Geschichte (supra, p. 118). A good 
analysis of the chronology is contained in the third volume of the Fasti Hellenici 
of Clinton (pp. 379-400), and a valuable summary in the Corpus Inscriptionum 
Grmcarum of BoECKH, vol, iii. p. 288. 

I. The kingdom of the Ptolemies, which owed its origin to 
Alexander the Great, rose to a pitch of greatness and prosperity 
which, it is probable, was never dreamt of by the Con- Flourishing 
queror. His subjection of Egypt was accomplished condition of 
rapidly ; and he spent but little time in the organisa- ^ "^ °'"' 
tion of his conquest. Stilly the foundation of all Egypt's later great- 
ness was laid, and the character of its second civilisation deter- 
mined, by him, in the act by which he transferred the seat of 
government from the inland position of Memphis to the maritime 
Alexandria. By this alteration not only was the continued pre-emi- 
nence of the Macedo-Greek element secured, but the character of 



232 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

the Egyptians themselves was modified. Commercial pursuits were 
adopted by a large part of the nation. Intercourse with foreigners, 
hitherto checked and discouraged, became common. Production 
was stimulated; enterprise throve; and the stereotyped habits 
of this most rigid of ancient peoples were to a large extent broken 
into. In language and religion they still continued separate from 
their conquerors ; but their manners and tone of thought underwent 
a change. The stiff-necked rebels against the authority of the 
Persian crown became the willing subjects of the Macedonians. 
Absorbed in the pursuits of industry, or in the novel employment 
of literature, the Egyptians forgot their old love of independence, 
and contentedly acquiesced in the new regime. 

The history of Egypt during this period is, in the main, the history of 
Alexandria, the capital. Here, and here alone, were the Macedo-Greeks 
settled in any considerable numbers. Here dwelt the Court ; and here was 
to be seen that remarkable contrast of three widely differing elements — the 
Greek, the Jewish, and the native Egyptian — which gave to the Ptolemaic 
kingdom its peculiar character. The Jews were granted by the first Ptolemy 
great privileges in the new capital ; and these they retained to the time of the 
Roman conquest. They formed a distinct community in Alexandria, which 
had its own organisation, and was governed by its own officers. The Macedo- 
Greeks were, of course, the sole full citizens. They were divided into tribes 
(0wXa/), and into wards (S7;/Liot), and had no doubt a Bov^rj, or municipal 
council. The native Egyptians would be without any such privileges. A 
judge, probably nominated by the monarch, was placed at their head, who 
was answerable for their tranquillity. On the government and topography 
of ancient Alexandria the student may consult 

Meineke, Analecta Alexandrina. Berhn, 1843; 8vo. 

BoNAMY, Description de la 'ville d^ Alexandrie in the Memoires de V Academie 
des Inscriptions, vol. ix. 

ManSO, Briefe uber alt- Alex andrie, in his Vermischte Schriften, vol. i. ; and 
the article on Alexandria in Dr. W. Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman 
Geography. 

2. In the history of nations much depends on the characters 

of individuals ; and Egypt seems to have been very largely in- 

Reign of debted to the first Ptolemy for her extraordinary 

Ptolemy I prosperity. Assigned the African provinces in the 

B.C. ' division of Alexander's dominions after his death 

He^conmfers ^^'^' 3^3)^ ^^ proceeded at once to his government, 

Palestine, and, resigning any great ambition, sought to render 

part of Syria, ^^^ ^^n territory unassailable, and to make such 

and Cyprus, additions to it as could be attempted without much 

risk. It was among his special aims to make Egypt a great naval 

power -y and in this he succeeded almost beyond his hopes, having 

after many vicissitudes established his authority over Palestine, 

Phoenicia^ and Coele-Syria; and also possessed himself of the 



PEB. III. PABT II.] PTOLEMIES, 233 

island of Cyprus. Cilicia^ Caria, and Pamphylia were open to his 
attacks, and sometimes subject to his sway. For a time he even 
held important positions in Greece, e.g. Corinth and Sicyon; but 
he never allowed the maintenance of these distant acquisitions to 
entangle him inextricably in foreign wars, or to endanger his 
home dominions. Attacked twice in his own province, once by 
Perdiccas (b.c. 321), and once by Demetrius and Antigonus 
(b.c 306), he both times repulsed his assailants and maintained 
his own territory intact. Readily retiring if danger threatened, 
he was always prompt to advance when occasion offered. His 
combined prudence and vigour obtained the reward of ultimate 
success j and his death left Egypt in possession of all the more 
important of his conquests. 

It was essential to the plans of Ptolemy Lagi (Soter) to possess himself of 
Palestine and Phcenicia; for, in order that Egypt might be a great naval 
power, she required both the timber of those countries and the services 
of their sea-faring population. Ptolemy first occupied them B.C. 320, almost 
immediately after repulsing the attack of Perdiccas, when he took Laomedon, 
the Syrian satrap, prisoner, placed garrisons in the Phoenician towns, and 
annexed the whole region as far as the Taurus range. Six years later, 
B.C. 314, in the war of the satraps with Antigonus, on the siege and fall of 
Tyre, all was again lost; and though the battle of Gaza, B.C. 312, enabled 
Ptolemy once more to advance and recover his ground to some extent, yet 
in the peace of B.C. 311 the whole of the disputed territory was ceded. It 
was partially recovered in B.C. 302, after the attack of Antigonus on Egypt 
had failed, and he was threatened by Lysimachus and Seleucus. By the 
peace which followed the battle of Ipsus, B.C. 301, Ptolemy was left in 
possession of what he had regained, which included Palestine, Phoenicia, and 
perhaps a part of Coele-Syria ; but not Upper Syria, which fell to Seleucus. 

At what time Ptolemy first occupied Cyprus is uncertain ; but as early as 
B. c. 3 14 it was the scene of conflict between his forces and those of Antigonus. 
Two years later, B.C. 312, it was completely subjugated by the Egyptian 
monarch, who placed it under the government of an officer, called Nicocreon, 
allowing, however, a certain subordinate authority to the native kings. One 
of these, Nicocles, king of Paphos, having intrigued with Antigonus, was, in 
B.C. 309, put to death. In B.C. 306 occurred the expedition of Demetrius 
against Cyprus, the siege of Salamis, and the great naval defeat of Ptolemy 
(see p. 215), which gave Cyprus over to Antigonus and Demetrius. Even 
after Ipsus the island remained faithful to the last-named prince ; and it was 
not till B.C. 294 or 293, when Demetrius was engaged in Macedonia, that 
Ptolemy once more led an expedition into the island and re-established his 
authority over it. From this time Cyprus remained an undisputed possession 
of the Egyptian crown. It was regarded as the most valuable of all the 
foreign dependencies, on account of its position, its mineral wealth, and 
its large stores of excellent timber. The Ptolemies governed it by means 
of a viceroy, who was always a nobleman of the first rank, and united in his 
person the military, civil, and sacerdotal authority, his title in inscriptions 
being aTparqyos koI vavap^os koI a.p)(i€pevs 6 Kara rrjv vrjcrou. 

3. In one quarter alone did Ptolemy endeavour to extend his 
African dominion. The flourishing country of the Cyrenaica, 



234 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

which lay not far from Egypt upon the west, had welcomed 

„ J ,. . Alexander as a deliverer from the power of Persia, 
Reduction of ^ ' 

the Cyrenaica and been accepted by him into alliance. Ptolemy, 
Libyan\ribes ^^° coveted its natural wealth, and disliked the ex- 
between it istence of an independent republic in his neighbour- 
hood, found an occasion in the troubles which at 
this time fell upon Cyrene, to establish his authority over the 
whole region. At the same time he must have brought under 
subjection the Libyan tribes of the district between Egypt and 
the Cyrenaica, who in former times had been dependent upon the 
native Egyptian monarchy, and had submitted to the Persians 
when Egypt was conquered by Cambyses. 

Details of the Conquest. Invasion of the Cyrenaica by Thimbron with 
a body of mercenaries. He seizes the port of Cyrene and attacks the town, 
B.C. 320. The Cyrenians accept a position of dependance ; but soon after- 
wards revolt, and, while Thimbron is engaged in repelling their attack upon 
his Barcasan allies, they recover their port. Both sides having received 
reinforcements, a great battle takes place, in which Thimbron is victorious. 
Disturbances follow in Cyrene, and the nobles, being expelled by the people, 
fly to Egypt and persuade Ptolemy to reinstate them ; which he does by his 
general, Ophelias, who then subdues the entire region. After remaining 
subjects of Egypt for seven years, the Cyrenians revolted, B. c. 313, but were 
reduced by Ptolemy's general, Agis. After this, however, Ophelias seem.s 
to have made himself practically independent ; and Egypt might have lost her 
dependancy altogether, if his ambition had not prompted him to accept the 
specious proposals of Agathocles, who needed his support against Carthage. 
When Ophelias fell a victim to the treachery of the Sicilian adventurer, 
B.C. 308, Ptolemy seized the opportunity, and, once more occupying the 
country, placed it under the government of his son, Magas. 

4. The system of government established by Ptolemy Lagi, 

so far as it can be made out, was the following. The monarch 

Governmental was Supreme, and indeed absolute, having the sole 

system : direction of affairs and the sole appointment of all 

treatment of , . , . 

the native oiBcers. The changes, however, made m the in- 
Egyptians. ternal administration were few. The division of 
the whole country into nomes was maintained ; and most of the 
old nomes were kept, a certain number only being subdivided. 
Each was ruled by its nomarch, who received his appointment 
from the crown, and might at any time be superseded. The 
nomarchs were frequently, perhaps even generally, native 
Egyptians. They administered in their provinces the old 
Egyptian laws, and maintained the old Egyptian religion. It 
was from first to last a part of the established policy of the 
Lagid monarchs to protect and honour the religion of their 



PER. III. PAET II.] PTOLEMIES. 235 

subjects, which they regarded as closely akin to their own, and of 
which they ostentatiously made themselves the patrons. Ptolemy 
Lagi began the practice of rebuilding and ornamenting the temples 
of the Egyptian gods, and paid particular honour to the supposed 
incarnations of Apis. The old privileges of the priests, and 
especially their exemption from land-tax, were continued; and 
they were allowed everywhere the utmost freedom in the exercise 
of every rite of their religion. In return for these favours the 
priests were expected to acknowledge a quasi-divinity in the Lagid 
monarchs, and to perform certain ceremonies in their honour, 
both in their lifetime and after their decease. 

5. At the same time many exclusive privileges were reserved 
for the conquering race. The tranquillity of the country was 
maintained by a standing army composed almost p . .. 
exclusively of Greeks and Macedonians, and officered the Greeco- 
wholly by members of the dominant class. This Macedonians. 
army was located in, comparatively, a few spots, so that its pre- 
sence was not much felt by the great bulk of the population. 
As positions of authority in the military service were reserved for 
Grseco-Macedonians, so also in the civil service of the country 
all offices of any importance were filled up from the same class. 
This class, moreover, which was found chiefly in a small number 
of the chief towns, enjoyed full municipal liberty in these places, 
electing its own officers, and, for the most part, administering its 
own affairs without interference on the part of the central go- 
vernment. 

Disposition of the Standing Army. Alexander stationed the troops 
with which he garrisoned Egypt at two places only, Pelusium and Memphis ; 
the latter being the native capital — the Moscow of the Egyptians — and the 
former the key of Egypt on the only side on which it is open to a land attack. 
In later times, PtolemaYs in the Thebaid, Elephantine, and Parembole in 
Nubia were likewise made military stations ; and an important body of troops 
was also maintained at Alexandria, where they guarded the person of the 
monarch. 

6. One of the chief peculiarities of the early Lagid kingdom 
— a peculiarity for which it was indebted to its founder — was its 
encouragement of literature and science. Ptolemy 

T • 1-1^ I Encouragement 

Lagi was himself an author ; and, alone among the of learning 
successors of Alexander, inherited the regard for ^'^^ science. 
men of learning and research which had distinguished his great 
patron. Following the example of Aristotle, he set himself to 



236 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

collect an extensive library, and lodged it in a building connected 
with the royal palace. Men of learning were invited by him 
to take up their residence at Alexandria j and the ' Museum' was 
founded, a College of Professors^ which rapidly drew to it a vast 
body of students, and rendered Alexandria the university of the 
Eastern world. It was too late in the history of the Greek race 
to obtain, by the fostering influence of judicious patronage^ the 
creation of masterpieces ; but exact science, criticism, and even 
poetry of an unpretentious kind were produced- and much ex- 
cellent literary work was done^ to the great benefit of the 
moderns. Euclid, and Apollonius of Perga, in mathematics ; 
Philetas, Callimachus, and Apollonius of Rhodes, in poetry^ 
Aristophanes of Byzantium, and Aristarchus, in criticism; Era- 
tosthenes in chronology and geography; Hipparchus in astrono- 
mical science ; and Manetho in history, — adorned the Lagid period, 
and sufficiently indicate that the Lagid patronage of learning was 
not unfruitful. Apelles, too, and Antiphilus produced many of 
their best pictures at the Alexandrian court. 

Four lines of study, corresponding to the modern ' faculties/ were chiefly 
pursued by academical students at Alexandria — viz. Poetry, Mathematics, 
Astronomy, and Medicine, criticism being included under poetry. The 
' Museum,' or university building, comprised chambers for the Professors ; 
a common hall where they took their meals together ; a long corridor for 
exercise and ambulatory lectures ; a theatre for scholastic festivals and public 
disputations ; a botanical garden ; and a menagerie. It has been well said, 
that the services rendered by the ' Museum ' to learning are probably greater 
than those of any ' Academy ' in modern Europe. Further details on this 
interesting subject will be found in 

Geier, De PtolemcEt Lagidis vita, et commentariorum fragmentis commentatio. 
Halse Sax., 1838 ; 4to. 

Heyne, De Genio scEculi PtolemcEorum, in his Opuscula Academica. Gottingen, 
1785-8 ; 3 vols. 8vo. 

Matter, Essai historique sur Vecole d' Alexandrie. Paris, 1820 ; and edition, 
1840. 

Vakikry, Das Alexandrinische Museum. Berlin, 1838 ; 8vo. 

7. The character of Ptolemy Lagi was superior to that of most 
of the princes who were his contemporaries. In an age of 

Character of treachery and violence, he appears to have remained 
Ptolemy Lagi. faithful to his engagements, and to have been rarely 
guilty of any bloodshed that was not absolutely necessary for his 
own safety and that of his kingdom. His mode of life was simple 
and unostentatious. He was a brave soldier, and never scrupled 
to incur personal danger. The generosity of his temper was 
evinced by his frequently setting his prisoners free without ran- 



PEB. III. PAET II.] PTOLEMIES. 237 

som. In his domestic relations he was^ however, unhappy. He 
married two wives, Eurydice, the daughter of Antipater, whom he 
divorced, and Berenice, her companion. By Eurydice he had 
a son, Ptolemy Ceraunus, who should naturally have been his 
successor j but Berenice prevailed on him in his old age to prefer 
her son, Philadelphus ; and Ptolemy Ceraunus, offended, became 
an exile from his country, and an intriguer against the interests 
of his brother and his other relatives. Enmity and bloodshed 
were thus introduced into the family; and to that was shortly 
afterwards added the crime of incest, a fatal cause of decay and 
corruption. 

8. Ptolemy Lagi adorned his capital with a number of great 
works. The principal of these were the royal palace, the Museum, 
the lofty Pharos, upon the island which formed the ^iSs. great 
port, the mole or causeway, nearly a mile in works, 
length (Heptastadium), which connected this island with the 
shore, the Soma or mausoleum, containing the body of Alexander, 
the temple of Ssrapis (completed by his son, Philadelphus), and 
the Hippodrome or great race-course. He likewise rebuilt the 
inner chamber of the grand temple at Karnak, and probably 
repaired many other Egyptian buildings. After a 

reign of forty years, having attained to the advanced 
age of eighty-four, he died in Alexandria, B.C. 283, leaving his 
crown to his son, Philadelphus, the eldest of his children by 
Berenice, whom he had already two years before associated with 
him in the kingdom. 

The nomination of Philadelphus by Ptolemy Lagi has been paralleled with 
that of Xerxes by Darius, and supposed to have rested on the same right 
(Niebuhr) ; but, practically, the reign of the Egyptian monarch had com- 
menced before his marriage with Eurydice. The real resemblance is that 
in both cases the younger son owed his advancement to the influence of his 
mother over a father already in his dotage. 

9. Ptolemy II, surnamed Philadelphus, was born at Cos, b. c. 309, 
and was consequently twenty-six years of age at the commence- 
ment of his sole reign. He inherited his father's j^gj ^f 
love for literature and genius for administration, Ptolemy 11 

. o -1, , ,• I (Philadelphus), 

but not his military capacity. Still, he did not b.c. 

abstain altogether even from aggressive wars, but had 283-247. 
an eye to the events which were passing in other countries, and 
sought to maintain by his arms the balance of power established 



238 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

in his father's lifetime. His chief wars were with the rebel king 
of Cyrene, his half-brother, Magas ; with Antiochus I 
and Antiochus II, kings of Syria ; and with An- 
tigonus Gonatas, king of Macedon. They occupied the space 
of about twenty years, from b.c. 369 to 249. Philadelphus was 
fairly successful in them, excepting that he was forced, as the 
result of his struggle with Magas, to acknowledge the independence 
of that monarch. 

Details of these Wars. («) Macedonian War : — As early as B.C. 269 
Philadelphus seems to have sent aid to the Spartan king, Areus, who was 
threatened by Antigonus. Shortly afterwards he dispatched a fleet under 
Patroclus to assist and protect the Athenians, B.C. 247 (?). In B.C. 251 he 
gave pecuniary help to Aratus when that patriot first formed the project 
of raising up a counterpoise to Macedon in the famous ' Achaean League.' 
Some years later he became an actual ally of the League. (^) Cyrenaean 
and S3rrian Wars : — These two wars were closely connected. It is un- 
certain in what year Magas asserted his independence, but in B.C. 266, not 
content with the kingdom of Gyrene, he marched against Egypt, attacked 
and took Parsetonium, and was proceeding further eastward when a revolt 
of the Marmaridse, a native African tribe, recklled him. Two years later, 
B.C. 264, having made a treaty with Antiochus I (whose daughter, Apame, 
was his wife), he undertook a second expedition, and once more occupied 
Parsetonium, Philadelphus, however, found means to frustrate the efforts 
of both his antagonists. Antiochus was kept employed at home, and Magas 
without his ally was unable to make any progress. After a while a partial 
peace was made. Magas was recognised as independent monarch of the 
Cyrenaica, and his daughter, Berenice, was betrothed to the eldest son 
of Philadelphus, Ptolemy (Euergetes), B.C. 259. Hostilities continued with 
Syria, where Antiochus II had succeeded his father; but in B.C. 249 this war 
also was terminated by a marriage, Antiochus receiving the hand of Berenice, 
Philadelphus' daughter. It was probably during the Syrian War that Phila- 
delphus possessed himself of the coast, at any rate, of Caria, Lycia, Pamphylia, 
and Cilicia, and also of many of the Cyclades. 

10. The home administration of Ptolemy Philadelphus was in 

all respects eminently successful. To him belongs the credit 

of developing to their fullest extent the commercial 

administration, advantages which the position of Egypt throws open 

Encouragement iq ^gj. and of bringing by these means her material 

01 commerce. o o j 

prosperity to its culminating point. By re-opening 
the canal uniting the Red Sea with the Nile — a construction 
of the greatest of the Ramesside kings (see p. 69) — and building 
the port of Arsinoe on the site of the modern Suez, he united the 
East and West, allowing the merchandise of either region to 
reach the other by water carriage. As this, however, owing 
to the dangers of the Red Sea navigation_, was not enough, he 
constructed two other harbours, and founded two other cities, 
each called Berenice, on the eastern African coast, one nearly 



PEE. III. PART II.] PTOLEMIES, 239 

in Lat. 34°, the other still further to the south, probably about 
Lat. 13°. A high road was opened from the northern Berenice 
to Coptos on the Nile (near Thebes), and the merchandise of 
India, Arabia, and Ethiopia flowed to Europe for several centuries 
chiefly by this route. The Ethiopian trade was particularly 
valuable. Not only was ivory imported largely from this region, 
but the elephant was hunted on a large scale, and the hunters' 
captures were brought alive into Egypt, where they were used 
in the military service. Ptolemai's, in Lat. 18° 40', was the 
emporium for this traffic. 

Other steps taken by Philadelphus with a view to the extension or security 
of commerce were, (i) his suppression of the banditti which infested Upper 
Egypt at the very outset of his reign ; (2) his exploration of the western 
or Arabian coast of the Red Sea, by means of a naval expedition under 
Satyrus ; and (3) his dispatch of an ambassador named Dionysius to India, 
on a mission to the native princes. 

On the trade of Alexandria see the treatise of De Schmidt, Opuscula qidbus 
res antiqucB precipue jEgyptiaccB explanantur. Garolsruh., 1765 ; 8vo. 

II. The material prosperity of Egypt, which these measures 
insured, was naturally accompanied by a flourishing condition 
of the revenue. Philadelphus is said to have derived 
from Egypt alone, without counting the tribute in 
grain, an annual income of 14,800 talents (more than three and 
a half millions sterling), or as much as Darius Hystaspis obtained 
from the whole of his vast empire. The revenue was raised 
chiefly from customs, but was supplemented from other sources. 
The remoter provinces, Palestine, Phoenicia, Cyprus, &c., seem 
to have paid a tribute ; but of the mode of its assessment we 
know nothing. 

1 3. The military force which Philadelphus maintained is said to 
have amounted to 300,000 foot and 40,000 horse, besides elephants 
and war-chariots. He had also a fleet of 1,500 L^nd and 
vessels, many of which were of extraordinary size. sea forces. 
The number of rowers required to man these vessels must have 
exceeded, rather than fallen short of, 600,000 men. 

13. The fame of Philadelphus depends, however, far less upon his 
military exploits, or his talents for organisation and administration, 
than upon his efforts in the cause of learning. In Patronage of 
this respect, if in no other, he surpassed his father, learning. 
and deserves to be regarded as the special cause of the literary glories 
of his country. The library, which the first Ptolemy had founded. 



240 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

was by the second so largely increased that he has often been 
regarded as its author. The minor library of the Serapeium was 
entirely of his collection. Learned men were invited to his court 
from every quarter; and literary works of the highest value were 
undertaken at his desire or under his patronage. Among these 
the most important were the translation of the Hebrew Scriptures 
into the Greek language (which was commenced in his reign and 
continued under several of his successors), and the 'History of 
Egypt,' derived from the native records, which was composed in 
Greek during his reign by the Egyptian priest, Manetho. Phila- 
delphus also patronised painting and sculpture, and adorned his 
capital with architectural works of great magnificence. 

Among the galaxy of literary and scientific names which adorned the court 
of Philadelphus the most remarkable are the poets Theocritus and Calli- 
MACHUS, Zenodotus the grammarian, Euclid, the philosophers Hegesias 
and Theodorus, and the astronomers Timocharis, Aristarchus of Samos, 
and Aratus. Of these, first Zenodotus, and then Callimachus held the office 
of Librarian. ' 

On the subject of the Alexandrian Library, or Libraries, the student may 
consult with advantage 

Beck, Specimen h'lstorim bibliothecarum Alexandr'marum. Llpsias, 1810 ; 4to. 

Dedel, G,, Historia critica bibliothecce Alexandrina. Lugd. Bat. 1823 ; 4to. 

RiTSCHEL, Die Alexandrinischen Bibliotheken unter der ersten Ptolem'dern. 
Breslau, 1838 ; 8vo. 

14. In his personal character, Philadelphus presents an unfavour- 
able contrast to his father. Immediately upon attaining the throne 
_, , . he banished Demetrius Phalereus, for the sole offence 

Character of ' 

Philadelphus. that he had advised Ptolemy Lagi against altering 
IS eat . ^YyQ succession. Shortly afterwards he put to death 
two of his brothers. He divorced his first wife Arsinoe, the 
daughter of Lysimachus, and banished her to Coptos in Upper 
Egypt, in order that he might contract an incestuous marriage 
with his full sister, Arsinoe, who had been already married to his 
half-brother Ceraunus. To this princess, who bore him no 
children, he continued tenderly attached, taking in reference to 
her the epithet ' Philadelphus,' and honouring her by giving her 
name to several of the cities which he built, and erecting to her 
memory a magnificent monument at Alexandria, which was known 
as the Arsinoeum. Nor did he long survive her decease. He died 
in B.C. 247, of disease, at Alexandria, having lived sixty-two years, 
and reigned thirty-eight, or thirty-six from the death of his father. 

The gold coins of Philadelphus and his wife Arsinoe are numerous, and 
exceedingly beautiful. 



PER. III. PART II.] PTOLEMIES. 241 

15. Ptolemy III, surnamed Euergetes ('the Benefactor')^ the 
eldest son of Philadelphus by his first wife, succeeded him. This 
prince was the most enterprising of all the Lagid Reign of 
monarchs j and under him Egypt, which had hitherto j^E^e^^^Jtes^''' 
maintained a defensive attitude, became an aggres- b. c. 

247—222 

sive power, and accomplished important conquests, j^^g ^^^^ ^^^ 

The greater part of these were, it is true, retained conquests. 

for only a few years ; but others were more permanent, and became 

real additions to the empire. The empire obtained now its 

greatest extension, comprising, besides Egypt and Nubia, the Cyre- 

na'ica, whicli was recovered by the marriage of Berenice, daughter 

and heiress of Magas, to Euergetes j parts of Ethiopia, especially 

the tract about Adule ; a portion of the opposite or Western coast 

of Arabia ; Palestine, Phoenicia, and Coele-Syria ^ Cyprus, Cilicia, 

Pamphylia, Lycia, Caria, and Ionia ; the Cyclades ^ and a portion 

of Thrace, including the city of Lysimacheia in the Chersonese. 

"Wars of Euergetes. {a) With Syria. First War. The wrongs of his 
sister, Berenice, who was first divorced by Antiochus, and then murdered by 
Laodice, with the consent of Seleucus Callinicus (see p." 22 2), provoked Euer- 
getes to invade Syria, B.C. 245. Having taken Antioch, he crossed the 
Euphrates and reduced Mesopotamia, Babylonia, Susiana, Media, and Persia. 
The eastern provinces to the borders of Bactria submitted to him. At the 
same time, his fleet ravaged the coasts of Asia Minor and Thrace, reducing all 
the maritime tracts to subjection. Recalled toEgyptbya threatening of troubles, 
about B.C. 243, he rapidly lost his eastern conquests, which were recovered 
by Seleucus ; but those in Asia Minor and in Europe, which depended on his 
command of the sea, continued subject to him. The first war was terminated, 
B.C. 241, by a truce for ten years, after it had raged for four years over almost 
the whole of Western Asia. — Second War. A quarrel having broken out 
between Seleucus and his brother, Antiochus Hierax, Euergetes sided with the 
latter. After numerous alternations, success rested with Seleucus ; and Antio- 
chus fled to Egypt, where Ptolemy kept him a prisoner. At the same time he 
made peace with Seleucus, B.C. 229. {b) War ivith Macedonia. Euergetes 
followed his father's pohcy in this quarter, supporting Aratus and the Achaean 
league until they came to terms with Antigonus, and then supporting Cleo- 
menes of Sparta against the confederates. In the course of the struggle, his 
admirals engaged the fleet of Antigonus off' Andros, and completely defeated 
it. (c) War nvith Ethiopia. Towards the close of his reign, Euergetes turned 
his arms against his southern neighbours, and made himself master of the coast 
about Adule, where he set up his famous inscription. (See above, p. 231.) 

16. Friendly relations had been established with Rome by 
Ptolemy Philadelphus, as early as b.c. 273. Euergetes continued 
this policy, but declined the assistance which the Relations 
great republic was anxious to lend him in his Syrian '^'^'ith Rome, 
wars. It would seem that already the ambitious projects of Rome 
and her aspirations after universal dominion were already, at the 
least, suspected. 



242 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

17. Like his father and grandfather, Euergetes was a patron of 
art and letters. He added largely to the great Library at Alexan- 

Patronage of *^'"i^j collecting the best manuscripts from all quarters, 
learning. sometimes by very questionable means. The poet, 
Apollonius Rhodius, the geographer and chronologist, Eratosthenes, 
and the grammarian, Aristophanes of Byzantium, adorned his court. 
Alexandria does not seem to have owed to him many of her build- 
ings j but he gratified his Egyptian subjects by important archi- 
tectural works, as well as by the restoration of various images of 
their gods, which he had recovered in his Eastern expedition. 

Large additions were made by Euergetes to the great temple at Thebes, He 
also erected an entirely new one at Esne ; and dedicated one to Osiris at 
Canopus in the name of himself and his wife, Berenice. 

18. After a reign of twenty-five years, during which he had enjoyed 
almost uninterrupted success, and had raised Egypt to perhaps 

Death f ^'^^ highest pitch of prosperity that she ever attained, 

Ptolemy Euergetes died, according ' to the best authority, by a 

uerge es. ^^tural death J though there were not wanting persons 

to ascribe his decease to the machinations of his son. He left 

behind him three children — Ptolemy, who succeeded him, Magas, 

and Arsinoe, who became the wife of her elder brother. 

T9. The glorious period of the Macedo-Egyptian history termi- 
nates with Euergetes. Three kings of remarkable talent and 
of moderately good moral character had held the 
of the brilliant throne for a little .more than a century (loi years), 
period of ^s^^ j^g^j rendered Egypt the most flourishing of the 

Lagid history. ^■' ^ ° 

kingdoms which had arisen out of the disruption of 
Alexander's empire. They were followed by a succession of 
wicked and incapable monarchs, among whom it is difficult to 
find one who has any claim to our respect or esteem. Historians 
reckon nine Ptolemies after Euergetes. Except Philometor, who 
was mild and humane, Lathyrus, who was amiable but weak_, and 
Ptolemy XII (sometimes called Dionysus), who was merely young 
and incompetent, they were all, almost equally, detestable. 

20. Ptolemy IV, who assumed the title of Philopator to disarm 

Reim f ^'^ suspicions which ascribed to him the death of 

Ptolemy IV his father, was the eldest son of Euergetes, and 

^^Q. ascended the throne B.C. 333. His first acts, after 

222-205. seating himself upon the throne, were the murder 

of his mother, Berenice, who had wished her younger son to obtain 



PER. III. PAET II.] PTOLEMIES. 243 

the succession ; of his brothei-, Magas j and of his father's brother, 
Lysimachus. He followed up these outrages by 
quarrelling with the Spartan refugee, Cleomenes, weakness and 
and driving him into a revolt, which cost him and his ^ ^^^'^ ^'^' 
family their lives. He then contracted an incestuous marriage 
with his sister, Arsinoe, and abandoning the direction of affairs to 
his minister, Sosibius, the adviser of these measures, gave himself 
up to a life of intemperance and profligacy. Agathoclea, a pro- 
fessional singer, and her brother, Agathocles, the children of a 
famous courtesan, became his favourites, and ruled the court, 
while Sosibius managed the kingdom. To gratify these minions 
of his pleasures^ Philopator, about b.c. 308, put to death his wife, 
Arsinoe, after she had borne him an heir to the empire. 

21. The weakness of Philopator^ and the mismanagement of the 
State by Sosibius, who was at once incapable and wicked, laid the 
empire open to attack ; and it was not long before ^^^ of 
the young king of Syria, Antiochus III, took advan- Philopator 
tage of the condition of affairs to advance his own Antiochus 
pretensions to the possession of the long-disputed ^^^ Great. 
tract between Syria Proper and Egypt. It might have been 
expected that, under the circumstances, he would have been suc- 
cessful. But the Egyptian forces, relaxed though their discipline 
had been by Sosibius, were still superior to the Syrians ^ and the 
battle of Raphia (b.c. 217) was a repetition of the lessons taught 
at Pelusium and Gaza. The invader was once more defeated upon 
the borders, and by the peace which followed, the losses of the 
two preceding years were, with one exception, recovered. 

Details of the War. Antiochus commenced, B.C. 219, by besieging 
Seleuceia, the port of Antioch, which had remained in the hands of the Egyptians 
since the great invasion of Euergetes. Being joined by Theodotus, the Egyp- 
tian governor of Coele-Syria, he invaded that country, took Tyre and Ptole- 
ma'is (Acre), and advanced to the frontiers of Egypt. The next year, B.C. 218, 
an Egyptian army under Nicolaiis was sent to oppose him ; but this force was 
completely defeated near Porphyreon. In the third year of the war, B.C. 217, 
Philopator marched out from Alexandria in person, with 70,000 foot, 
5,000 horse, and 73 elephants. Antiochus advanced to give him battle, and 
the two armies met at Raphia, on the eastern edge of the desert. After a vain 
attempt on the part of Theodotus to assassinate Philopator in his camp, an 
engagement took place, and Antiochus was completely defeated. He then 
made peace, relinquishing all his conquests but Seleuceia. 

2 2. The Syrian War was only just brought to a close when dis- 
affection showed itself among Philopator's Egyptian subjects. The 
causes of their discontent are obscure j and we are Revolt of the 
without any details as to the course of the struggle. Egyptians. 

R 2 



244 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

But there is evidence that it lasted through a considerable number 
of years, and was only brought to a close after much effusion of 
blood on both sides. 

23. Notwithstanding his inhumanity and addiction to the worst 
forms of vice, Philopator so far observed the traditions of his house 

p, ., , as to continue their patronage of letters. He lived 

patronage of on familiar terms with the men of learning who fre- 
iterature. q^ented his court, and especially distinguished with 
his favour the grammarian, Aristarchus. To show his admiration 
for Homer, he dedicated a temple to him. He further even 
engaged, himself, in literary pursuits, composing tragedies and 
poems of various kinds. 

34. Worn out prematurely by his excesses, Philopator died at 
about the age of forty, after he had held the throne for seventeen 

His death, years. He left behind him one only child, a son. 
Reign of named Ptolemy, the issue of his marriage with 

(Epiphanes), Arsinoe. This child, who at the time of his father's 

205-181 death was no more than five years old, was immedi- 

Regency of ately acknowledged as king. He reigned from B.C. 205 
of to 181, and is distinguished in history by the surname 

Tlepolemus. Qf Epiphanes. The affairs of Egypt during his mi- 
nority were, at first, administered by the infamous Agathocles, who, 
however, soon fell a victim to the popular fury, together with his 
sister, his mother, and his whole family. The honest but incom- 
petent Tlepolemus succeeded as regent • but in the critical circum- 
stances wherein Egypt was now placed by the league of Antiochus 
with Philip of Macedon (see above. Book IV. § 1 3), it was felt that 
incompetency would be fatal; and the important step was taken of 
calling in the assistance of the Romans, who sent M. Lepidus, 
B.C. 301, to undertake the management of affairs. Lepidus saved 

Regency of ^§7?^ ffom conquest J but was unable, or unwilling, 
Lepidus. to obtain for her the restoration of the territory 
whereof the two spoilers had deprived her by their combined 
attack. Antiochus succeeded in first deferring and then evading 
the restoration of his share of the spoil, while Philip did not even 
make a pretence of giving back a single foot of territory. Thus 
Egypt lost in this reign the whole of her foreign possessions except 
Cyprus and the Cyrenai'ca — losses which were never recovered. 

For the details of the war between Epiphanes and his assailants, see above, 
Book IV. Per. III. Part I. § 13, and below, Per. III. Part III. § 25. 



PER. III. PAET II.] PTOLEMIES. 245 

^5. Lepidus, on quitting Egypt, b. c. 199^ handed over the 
administration to Aristomenes, the Acarnanian, a man of vigour 
and probity, who restored the finances, and put fresh Rgpency of 
life into the administration. But the external were Aristomenes. 
followed by internal troubles. A revolt of the Egyptians, and 
a conspiracy on the part of the general, Scopas, showed the danger 
of a long minority, and induced the new regent to curtail his own 
term of office. At the age of fourteen, Epiphanes was declared 
of full age, and assumed the reins of government, b. c. 196. 

To this occasion belongs the famous ' Rosetta stone,' which contains a 
decree of the priests at the time of the coronation of Epiphanes, establishing 
the manner in which he was to be worshipped thenceforth in all the temples. 
Incidentally, there is an enumeration of all the benefits supposed to have been 
conferred by the monarch during his minority, which throws some light on 
the internal administration of Egypt, and also on the events of the earlier por- 
tion of Epiphanes' reign. 

26. But little is known of Epiphanes from the time of his 
assuming the government. His marriage with Cleopatra, the 
daughter of Antiochus the Great, which had been 

I ■ . • r . 1 . r Actiml reign 

arranged m b. c. 199 as a portion or the terms of of Epiphanes, 
peace, was not celebrated till b.c. 193, when he had ^•°- 

attained the age of seventeen. Shortly after this 
the monarch appears to have quarrelled with his minister and late 
guardian, Aristomenes, whom he barbarously removed by poison. 
A certain Polycrates then became his chief adviser, and assisted 
him to quell a second very serious revolt on the part of the native 
Egyptians. Towards the close of his reign he formed designs for 
the recovery of Coele -Syria and Palestine, which he proposed to 
wrest from Seleucus, who had succeeded his father, Antiochus. 
But, before he could carry his designs into effect, he was murdered 
by his officers, whom he had alarmed by an unguarded expression, 
B.C. 181. 

27. By his marriage with Cleopatra, Epiphanes had become the 
father of three children, two sons, both of whom received the 
name of Ptolemy, and a daughter, called after her j^^j^ ^^ 
mother. The eldest of these children, who took the Ptolemy VI 
surname of Philometor, succeeded him *, and reigned b.c. 

as Ptolemy VI. His age at his accession was I8i-i4e. 
only seven, and during his early years he remained under the 

* Lepsius interposes at this point a Ptolemy Eupator, whom he calls Ptolemy VI. 
His relationship to the kings who precede and follow him is not apparent. 



246 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

regency of his mother, whose administration was vigorous and 
successful. At her death, in b. c. 173^ the young prince fell under 
far inferior guardianship — that of £ul«us the eunuch and Lenaeus, 
ministers at once corrupt and incapable. These weak men, 
mistaking audacity for vigour, rashly claimed from Antiochus 
Epiphanes the surrender of Ccele-Syria and Palestine, the nominal 
dowry of the late queen-mother_, and, when their demand was 
contemptuously rejected, flew to arms. Their invasion of Syria 
His Syrian quickly brought upon them the vengeance of An- 
^^^- tiochus, who defeated their forces at Pelusium, 
B. c. 1 70, and would certainly have conquered all Egypt, had it not 
been for the interposition of the Romans, who made him retire, 
and even deprived him of all his conquests. 

Details of the "War with. Antiochus. After his victory at Pelusium, 
Antiochus advanced to Memphis, and having obtained possession of the young 
king's person, endeavoured to use him as his tool for effecting the entire 
reduction of the country. But the Alexandrians set up Philometor's brother, 
Ptolemy Physcon, as king, and successfully defended their city, till Antiochus 
raised the siege. Threatened by the Romans, he evacuated Egypt, except 
Pelusium, leaving Philometor as king at Memphis. But Philometor now 
refused to be a tool any more. Having come to terms with Physcon, B.C. 169, 
agreeing to reign jointly with him, and having married his sister, Cleopatra, 
he re-entered Alexandria and prepared for war. Antiochus, upon this, in- 
vaded Egypt a second time, while he also despatched an expedition against 
Cyprus, B.C. 168, and was completely successful in both places. Cyprus was 
conquered, and Alexandria would undoubtedly have fallen, had not the 
Romans interposed. Popillius ordered the conqueror to retire from Egypt, 
and to restore Cyprus to the Egyptians ; and Antiochus, though with extreme 
reluctance, obeyed both commands, B.C. 168. 

a8. By the timely aid thus given, Rome was brought into a new 

position with respect to Egypt. Hitherto she had merely been 

a friendly ally, receiving more favours than she 

New relations r j t t r i i • i 

between Conferred. Henceforth, she was viewed as exercis- 
Rome and j^g a sort of protectorate j and her right was recog- 
nised to interfere in the internal troubles of the 
kingdom, and to act as arbiter between rival princes. The claims 
of such persons were discussed before the Roman Senate, and the 
princes themselves went to Rome in person to plead their cause. 
The decision of the Senate was not, indeed, always implicitly 
obeyed^ but still Rome exercised a most important influence 
from this time, not only over the external policy but over the 
dynastic squabbles of the Egyptians. 

29. The joint reign of the two kings, Philometor and Physcon, 
which commenced in b. c. 169, continued till b. c. 165, when the 



PER. III. PART II.] PTOLEMIES. 247 

brothers quarrelled and Philometor was driven into exile. Having 
gone to Rome and implored assistance from the Senate, 
he was reinstated in his kingdom by Roman depu- philometor 
ties, who arranged a partition of the territory be- ^.'*\'^^.^ 
tween the brothers, which might have closed the Physcon, 
dispute, could Physcon have remained contented 164I154 
with his allotted portion. But his ambition and in- 
trigues caused fresh troubles, which were, however, quelled after 
a time by the final establishment of Physcon as king of 
Cyrene only. 

At the division of territory made in B.C. 164, Physcon received Cyrene 
and Libya. Discontented with this allotment, he went to Rome in the next 
year, and obtained the further grant of Cyprus, which Philometor was ex- 
pected to give up. He, however, refused ; and Physcon was preparing to go 
to war when Cyrene revolted and engaged his attention for some considerable 
time. In B.C. 154 he went for the second time to Rome, and received a 
squadron of five ships, to help him to obtain Cyprus. With these he pro- 
ceeded to the island and endeavoured to conquer it, but was defeated and 
made prisoner by his brother, who, however, not only spared his life, but 
re-established him as king of Cyrene. 

30. During the continuance of the war between the two 
brothers, Demetrius !_, who had become king of Syria, b. c. 162, 
had made an attempt to obtain possession of Cyprus ^^^^.^ ^^ 

by bribing the governor, and had thereby provoked Philometor 
the hostility of Philometor. No sooner, therefore, trius I and 
was Philometor free from domestic troubles than, Alexander 

^ Baias, 

resolving to revenge himself, he induced Alexander b. c. 

Balas to come forward as a pretender to the Syrian I5i-i46. 
crown, and lent him the full weight of his support, even giving 
him his daughter, Cleopatra, in marriage, b. c. 150. But the 
irigratitude of Balas, after he had obtained the throne by Ptolemy's 
aid, alienated his patron. The Egyptian king, having with some 
difficulty escaped a treacherous attempt upon his life, passed over 
to the side of the younger Demetrius, gave Cleopatra in marriage 
to him, and succeeded in seating him upon the throne. In the 
last battle, however, which was fought near Antioch, he was 
thrown from his horse, and lost his life, b. c. 146. 

31. Ptolemy Philometor left behind him three children, the 
issue of his marriage with his full sister, Cleopatra, „^. ^ ^. . ^ ^^ 
viz. a son, Ptolemy, who was proclaimed king, Ptolemy Vll 
under the name of Eupator (or Philopator, according ^ ^^^ ^^'' 

to Lepsius), and two daughters, both called Cleopatra, the elder 



248 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

married first to Alexander Balas and then to Demetrius II, the 
younger still a virgin. Eupator, after reigning a few days, was 
deposed and then murdered by his uncle, Physcon, the king of 
Cyrene, who claimed and obtained the throne. 

33. Ptolemy Physcon, called also Euergetes 11^ acquired the 

throne in consequence of an arrangement mediated by the Romans, 

. who stipulated that he should marry his sister Cleo- 

Ptolemy VIII patra, the widow of his brother, Philometor. Having 
B ^c become king in this way, his first act was the murder 

146-117. of his nephew. (See the last section.) He then pro- 
ceeded to treat with the utmost severity all those 
who had taken part against him in the recent contest, killing 
some and banishing others. By these measures he created such 
alarm, that Alexandria became half emptied of its inhabitants, 
and he was forced to invite new colonists to re-people it. Mean- 
while he gave himself up to gluttony and other vices, and became 
bloated to an extraordinary degree, and So corpulent that he could 
scarcely walk. He further repudiated Cleopatra, his sister, though 
she had borne him a son, Memphitis, and took to wife her 
daughter, called also Cleopatra, the child of his brother, Philo- 
metor. After a while his cruelties and excesses disgusted the 

His flight to Alexandrians, who broke out into frequent revolts. 
Cyprus. Several of these were put down ; but at last Physcon 
was compelled to fly to Cyprus, and his sister Cleopatra was made 
queen, B.C. 130. 

War followed for three years between the brother and sister. The murder 
of Memphitis, his own son, in order to grieve the mother, and the barbarous 
act of sending her the head and hands of his victim, so exasperated the Alex- 
andrians that at first they supported the cause of Cleopatra with spirit. But 
her imprudent application for aid to Demetrius II alarmed their patriotism, 
and induced them to recall Physcon, B.C. 127. Cleopatra took refuge in 
Syria. 

'3^0^. On the re-establishment of Physcon in his kingdom, he 

resolved to reverige himself on Demetrius for the support which 

he had given to Cleopatra. He therefore brought 

ment of forward the pretender Alexander Zabinas, and lent 

Physcon m \xim. sucli suDDort that he shortly became kins; of 

his kingdom. ^ ^ ■' ^ 

Syria, b. c. \%6. But Zabinas, like his reputed 
father, Balas, proved ungrateful; and the offended Physcon pro- 
ceeded to pull down the throne which he had erected, joining 
Antiochus Grypus against Zabinas, and giving him his daughter. 



PEB. III. PART II.] PTOLEMIES. 249 

Tryphsena, in marriage. The result was the ruin of Zabinas, 
and the peaceful establishment of Grypus^ with whom Physcon 
lived on friendly terms during the remainder of his life. 

The expulsion of Physcon from his kingdom seems to have taught him 
a lesson. No cruelties are recorded of him in the later portion of his reign. 
It was probably at this time that he showed himself a patron of letters, and 
composed the works which gave him some repute as an author. 

34. Physcon died in B.C. 117, and was succeeded by his eldest 
son_, Ptolemy IX, commonly distinguished by the epithet of 
Lathyrus. Egypt now lost the Cyrenaica^ which j^gj ^f 
was bequeathed by Physcon to his natural son, Ptolemy IX 

. . , , . , , 1 . 1 (Lathyrus), 

Apion^ who at his death made it over to the b,c. 

Romans. The ties which bound Cyprus to Egypt ii7-8i. 
also became relaxed^ for Lathyrus, and his brother, Alexander, 
alternately held it, almost as a separate kingdom. The reign 
of Lathyrus^ which commenced b. c. 117, did not terminate till 
B. c. 81, thus covering a space of thirty-six years j but during one- 
half of this time he was a fugitive from Egypt, ruling only over 
Cyprus, while his brother took his place at Alexandria. We must 
divide his reign into three periods — the first lasting Three 
from B.C. 117 to 107, a space of ten years, during periods, 
which he was nominal king of Egypt under the tutelage of his 
mother; the second, from b. c. 107 to 89, eighteen years, which 
he spent in Cyprus; and the third^ from b. c. 89 to 81, eight years, 
during which he ruled Egypt as actual and sole monarch. 

Details of this Reign. — First Period. Lathyrus, recalled from Cyprus, 
is forced to divorce his sister, Cleopatra, and to marry his other sister, Selene, 
who is more devoted to the interests of the queen-mother. He rules quietly, 
his mother having the real power, and his brother Alexander reigning in 
Cyprus, till B.C. 107, when, having offended his mother by pursuing a policy 
adverse to hers in Syria, he is driven out, and has to change places with 
Alexander. — Second Period. Lathyrus not only maintains himself as king 
of Cyprus against the attempts of his mother to dispossess him, but takes 
a part in the Syrian troubles, opposing the power of the Jews, and supporting 
Antiochus Cyzicenus and his son Demetrius. Meanwhile Cleopatra and 
Ptolemy Alexander rule Egypt conjointly, until at last they also 
quarrel ; Alexander, fearing his mother's designs, puts her to Reign of 
death ; and, the Alexandrians rising against him, he is expelled, ^teopatia and 
and Lathyrus summoned from Cyprus to resume the sove- /ai'^^"^^.t\ 
reignty. — Third Period. Lathyrus defeats an attempt of ^ 
Alexander to re-establish himself at Cyprus. Death of Alexander. Revolt 
and three years' siege of Thebes in Upper Egypt, terminates in its capture 
and ruin, B.C. 86. Lathyrus then reigns quietly till B.C. 81. 

35. Lathyrus left behind him one legitimate child only, Bere- 
nice, his daughter by Selene, who succeeded him upon the throne. 



250 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

and remained for six months sole monarch. She was then married 

Reims of ^° ^^'* ^^^^ cousin, Ptolemy Alexander 11, the son of 

Berenice and Ptolemv Alexander I, who claimed the crown of Esypt 

Ptolemy XI , f ' , .. ,, t ^ 

(Alexander II), Under the patronage or the great bulla. It was agreed 

B. c. 80. ^j^^|. ^i^gy should reign conjointly ; but within three 

weeks of his marriage, Alexander put his wife to death. This act 

so enraged the Alexandrians that they rose in revolt against the 

murderer and slew him in the public gymnasium^ B.C. 80. 

36. A time of trouble followed. The succession was disputed 
between two illegitimate sons of Lathyrus, two legitimate sons of 

Time of Selene, the sister of Lathyrus, by Antiochus Eusebes, 
confusion, king of Syria, her third husband, and probably other 
claimants. Roman influence was wanted to decide the contest, 
and Rome for some reason or other hung back. A further disinte- 
gration of the empire was the consequence. The younger of the 
two sons of Ptolemy Lathyrus seized Cyprus, and made it a separate 
kingdom. The elder seems to have possessed himself of a part of 
Egypt. Other parts of Egypt appear to have fallen into the power 
of a certain Alexander, called by some writers Ptolemy Alexander 
III, who was driven out after some years, and, flying to Tyre, died 
there and bequeathed Egypt to the Romans. 

37. Ultimately the whole of Egypt passed under the sway of the 
elder of the two illegitimate sons of Lathyrus, who took the titles 

of Neos Dionysos (' the New Bacchus '), Philopator, 

Ptolemy XII S-^^d Philadelphus, but was most commonly known as 

(Auletes), Auletes, ' the Flute-player.' The years of his reign 

were counted from b.c. 80, though he can scarcely 
have become king of all Egypt till fifteen years later, b.c. 6^. It 
was his great object during the earlier portion of his reign to get 
himself acknowledged by the Romans ; but this he was not able to 
effect till B.C. 59, the year of Csesar's Consulship_, when his bribes 
were effectual. But his orgies and his 'fluting' had by this time 
disgusted the Alexandrians ; so that, when he increased the weight 
of taxation in order to replenish his treasury, exhausted by the 
vast sums he had spent in bribery, they rose against him, and, after 
a short struggle, drove him from his kingdom. Auletes fled to 
Rome; and the Alexandrians placed upon the throne his two 
daughters, Tryphsena and Berenice, of whom the former lived only 
a year, while the latter retained the crown till the restoration of 
her father, b.c. ^^. He returned under the protection of Pompey, 



PER. III. PAET IT.] PTOLEMIES. 251 

who sent Gabinius at the head of a strong Roman force to reinstate 

him. The Alexandrians were compelled to submit • and Auletes 

immediately executed Berenice, who had endeavoured to retain the 

crown and had resisted his return in arms. Auletes then reigned 

about three years and a half in tolerable peace, under the protection 

of a Roman garrison. He died, b.c. 51, having done as much as 

in him lay to degrade and ruin his country. 

The chronological difRculties of the period between the deaths of Lathyrus 
and Auletes have been treated with great skill by Clinton in his Fasti Hellenici, 
vol. iii. Appendix, chap. 5, § 8, 9. A somewhat different view is taken by 
BoECKH (^Corp. Ins. Grate, vol. iii. p. 288). 

38. Ptolemy Auletes left behind him four children — Cleopatra, 
aged seventeen ; a boy, Ptolemy, aged thirteen j another boy, called 
also Ptolemy • and a girl, called Arsinoe. The last „ . , 
two were of very tender age. He left the crown, Cleopatra, 
under approval of the Romans, to Cleopatra and the ^'^' ^■'•"''"• 
elder Ptolemy, who were to rule conjointly, and to be married 
when Ptolemy was of full age. These directions were carried out ; 
but the imperious spirit of Cleopatra ill brooked any control, and it 
was not long ere she quarrelled with her boy-husband, and endea- 
voured to deprive him of the kingdom. War followed- and Cleopatra, 
driven to take refuge in Syria, was fortunate enough to secure the 
protection of Julius Csesar, whom she fascinated by her charms, 
B.C. 48. With his aid she obtained the victory over her brother, 
who perished in the struggle. Cleopatra was now established sole 
queen, b.c. 47, but on condition that she married in due time her 
other brother, the younger son of Auletes. Observing the letter of 
this agreement, Cleopatra violated its spirit by having her second 
husband, shortly after the wedding, removed by poison, b.c. 44. 
The remainder of Cleopatra's reign was, almost to its close, pros- 
perous. Protected by Julius Caesar during his lifetime, she suc- 
ceeded soon after his decease in fascinating Antony, b.c. 41, and 
making him her slave for the rest of his lifetime. The details of 
this period belong to Roman rather than to Egyptian history ; and 
will be treated in the last Book of this Manual. It will be suffi- 
cient to note here that the latest descendant of the Ptolemies 
retained the royal title to the end, and showed something of the 
spirit of a queen in preferring death to captivity, and perishing 
upon the capture of her capital, B.C. 30. 



252 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 



PART m. 

History of Macedonia, and of Greece, from the Death of Alexander to 
the Roman Conquest, B.C. 323 to 146. 

Sources. The sources for this history are nearly the same as those which 
have been cited for the contemporary history of Syria and Egypt. (See above, 
pp. 217 and 230.) The chief ancient authorities are Diodorus Siculus 
(books xix-xxxii, the first two of which only are complete), Polybius, Justin, 
Plutarch {VitCR Demetrii, Pyrrhi, yEmilii Paulli, Agidis, Cleomenis, Arati, Philo- 
fcEmon'is et Flaminini), and LiVY (books xxvi-xlv, and Epitomes of books 
xlvi-lii). To these may be added, for the Macedonian chronology, Eusebius 
(Chronicorum Canorum liber prior, c. xxxviii), and for occasional facts in the 
history, Pausanias. 

Of modern works treating of, or touching, the period, the most important 
are DroyseN, Nachfolger, &c. (supra, p. 218), Flathe, Geschichte Makedoniens 
(supra, p. 204), and Freeman, History of Federal Governments (supra, p. 125, 
chaps, v-ix). The third volume of Niebuhr's Lectures, and the last volume 
of Bp. Thirl wall's History of Greece, are also very worthy of the student's 
attention. Schorn's Geschichte Griechenlands (see p. 265) indicates also a 
careful study of the period. 

I. Grecian history had been suspended during the time of 

Alexander's career of conquest. A slight disturbance of the general 

tranquillity had indeed occurred when Alexander 

Greece during plunged into the unknown countries beyond the 

Alexander's Zagros range, by the movement against Antipater, 

conquests. , . , , o , • a • • • , • 

which the Spartan king, Agis, originated m b.c. 330. 

But the disturbance was soon quelled. Agis was defeated and 

slain ; and from this time the whole of Greece remained perfectly 

tranquil until the news came of Alexander's premature demise 

during the summer of b.c. y2<'3,. Then, indeed, hope rose high • 

and a great effort was made to burst the chains which bound 

Greece to the footstool of the Macedonian kings, Athens, under 

Demosthenes and Hyperides, taking, as was natural, the lead in the 

struggle for freedom. A large confederacy was formed j and the 

_, , ,, Lamian War was entered upon in the confident 
Great revolt. ^ 

Lamia War. expectation that the effect would be the liberation of 
B.C. 3 - . Qj.ge^g from the yoke of her oppressor. But the 
result disappointed these hopes. After a bright gleam of success, 
the confederate Greeks were completely defeated at Crannon, 
B.C. 332, and the yoke of Macedonia was riveted upon them more 
firmly than ever. 



PEK. III. PART III.] MACEDON AND GREECE. 253 

Details of the Lamian War. The league included Athens, Argos, Epi- 
daurus, Tra?zen, Elis, Messenia, Sicyon, Carystus in Euboea, Phocis, Locris, 
Doris, Dolopia, ^niania, the jEtolians, the Acarnanians, Leucas, part of 
Epirus, most of Thessaly, and the greater number of the Malians, ^tseans, and 
Achsans of Phthiotis. Athens furnished a worthy leader in Leosthenes, who 
defeated Antipater near Thermopylae, and forced him to seek a refuge within 
the walls of Lamia. Antipater sent urgent entreaties for aid to the Macedonian 
leaders in Asia, while Leosthenes pressed the siege, but without result, receiv- 
ing in the course of it, unfortunately for the Greek cause, a wound, from the 
effects of which he died, B.C. 323. The command fell to Antiphilus, who, 
early in B.C. 322, met and defeated the Macedonian general, Leonnatus, in 
Thessaly, as he was bringing succour to Antipater, but was in his turn beaten 
by the combined forces of Craterus and Antipater at Grannon in Thessaly ; 
after which the league fell to pieces, and the several states concluded separate 
treaties of peace with the conqueror, who granted favourable terms to all 
excepting Athens and ^tolia. Towards Athens extreme severity was shown. 
Twelve thousand out of the 21,000 citizens were actually deported from the 
city and removed to Thrace, Illyria, Italy, or the Gyrenai'ca. The 9,000 
richest citizens — the ' party of order' headed by Phocion — were left in exclusive 
possession of the state. A Macedonian garrison was at the same time placed 
in Munychia; and the leaders of the anti-Macedonian party, Demosthenes, 
Hyperides, and others, were proscribed. Their deaths soon followed ; and 
marked the complete extinction of Athenian autonomy, ^tolia was then 
threatened with a fate even worse than that which had befallen Athens. But 
the jEtolians resisted ; their country was a difficult one ; and, the ambition of 
Perdiccas having about this time alarmed Antipater for his own safety, the 
Macedonian forces were withdrawn from ^toha, and peace concluded, 
B.C. 321. 

2. The position of Antipater, as supreme ruler of Macedonia, 
was far from being safe and assured. The female members of 
the Macedonian royal family — Olympias, the widow 
of Philip ; Cleopatra, her daughter j Cynane, daughter position of 
of Philip by an Illyrian mother; and Eurydice, Antipater m 

\^ , Macedonia. 

daughter of Cynane by her husband Amyntas (him- 
self a first cousin of Alexander) — were, one and all, persons of 
ability and ambition, who saw with extreme dissatisfaction the 
aggrandizement of the generals of Alexander and the low condition 
into which the royal power had fallen, shared between an infant 
and an imbecile. Dissatisfied, moreover, with their own positions 
and prospects, they commenced intrigues for the purpose of improv- 
ing them. Olympias first offered the hand of Cleopatra to Leon- 
natus, who was to have turned against Antipater, if 
he had been successful in his Grecian expedition. of^e 
When the death of Leonnatus frustrated this scheme, Macedonian 

princesses. 
Olympias cast her eyes further abroad, and fixed on 

Perdiccas as the chief to whom she would betroth her daughter. 

Meanwhile, Cynane boldly crossed over to Asia with Eurydice, 

and offered her in marriage to Philip Arrhidseus, the nominal king. 



2 54 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

To gratify Olympias, who hated these members of the royal house, 
Perdiccas put Cynane to death ; and he would probably have like- 
wise removed Eurydice, had not the soldiers, exasperated at the 
mother's murder, compelled him to allow the marriage of the 
daughter with Philip. Meanwhile, he consented to Olympias' 
schemes, prepared to repudiate his wife^ Nicaea, the daughter of 
Antipater, and hoped, with the aid of his friend, Eumenes, to 
make himself master of the whole of Alexander's empire. (See 
above. Second Period, § 5.) 

3. The designs of Perdiccas, and his intrigues with Olympias, 
having been discovered by Antigonus, and the life of that chief 

Rupture being in danger from Perdiccas in consequence, he 
Antipater and ^^^ ^° Europe in the course of B.C. 322, and informed 

Perdiccas. Antipater and Craterus of their peril. Fully appre- 
" Asia? ^ ciating the importance of the intelligence, those 

B. c. 321. leaders at once concluded a league with Ptolemy, and 
in the spring of b.c. 321 invaded Asia for the purpose of attacking 
their rival. Here they found Eumenes prepared to resist them ; 
and so great was the ability of that general, that, though Perdiccas 
had led the greater portion of his forces against Egypt, he main- 
tained the war successfully, defeating and killing Craterus, and 
holding Antipater in check. But the murder of Perdiccas by his 
troops, and their fraternisation with their opponents, changed the 
whole face of affairs. Antipater found himself, without an effort, 
master of the situation. Proclaimed sole regent by the soldiers, 
he took the custody of the royal persons, re-distributed the satrapies 
(see above. Second Period, § 7), and, returning into Macedonia, 
held for about two years the first position in the empire. He was 

Death of HOW, however, an old man, and his late campaigns 

Antipater. had probably shaken him ; at any rate, soon after his 
return to Europe, he died, b.c. 318, leaving the regency to his 
brother officer, the aged Polysperchon. 

Antipater's conduct in passing over his two sons, Cassander and Philip, is 
certainly remarkable. Did he think them incapable, or was he only anxious 
to spare them the risks of great political exaltation ? 

4. The disappointment of Cassander, the elder of the two sur- 
viving sons of Antipater, produced the second great war between 

Regency of ^^^ generals of Alexander. Cassander, having begun 

Polysperchon. to intrigue against Polysperchon, was driven from 

Macedonia by the regent, and, flying to Antigonus, induced him 



PER. III. PART III.] MACEDON AND GREECE. 255 

to embrace his cause. The league followed between Antigonus, 
Ptolemy, and Cassander on the one hand, and Poly- Flight of 
sperchon and Eumenes on the other (see Second Period, Cassander. 
§ 9), Antigonus undertaking to contend with Eumenes in Asia, 
while Cassander afforded employment to Polysperchon in Europe. 

5. In the war which ensued between Cassander and Poly- 
sperchon, the former proved eventually superior. Polysperchon 
had on his side the influence of Olympias, which 

J ^ ' War of 

was great j and his proclamation of freedom to the Polysperchon 
Greeks was a judicious step^ from which he derived casTander 
considerable advantage. But neither as a soldier b. 0. 

nor as a statesman was he Cassander's equal. He 
lost Athens by an imprudent delay, and failed against Megalopolis 
through" want of military ability. His policy in allowing Olym- 
pias to gratify her hatreds without let or hindrance was ruinous 
to his cause, by thoroughly alienating the Macedonians. Cassan- 
der's triumph in B.C. 316 reduced him to a secondary position, 
transferring the supreme authority in Macedonia to his rival. 

Details of the "War. The rupture commenced with the seizure by 
Nicanor, one of Cassander's partisans, of the chief command at Munychia, 
B.C. 318. Polysperchon sent his son, Alexander, to negotiate with the Athe- 
nians, and, if possible, recover the fortress. At the same time, he published 
his edict, recalling the Greek exiles generally. The old citizens flocked back 
to Athens, and, espousing the cause of Polysperchon, endeavoured to induce 
Nicanor to withdraw. He, however, so far from yielding to their request, by 
a sudden attack occupied Tiraeus, and cut off Athens from the sea. This 
was done with the connivance of Phocion, who leant very decidedly towards 
Cassander. Presently, Polysperchon, finding that Alexander made no progress, 
advanced upon Athens in person ; whereupon the Athenians took heart, rose 
up against Phocion and his friends, and, having condemned and executed 
them, re-established a democratic constitution. Polysperchon should now 
have marched straight into Attica ; but, suffering minor matters to delay him, 
he allowed Cassander to sail in, occupy Piraeus, and deprive him of the whole 
advantage of the revolution. After a vain attempt to reduce Piraeus by siege, 
he left Athens to her fate, and invaded Peloponnese, where he was for the 
most part fairly successful, but failed completely against Megalopolis. Mean- 
while Athens came to terms with Cassander, accepting his rule, and submit- 
ting to receive as governor his nominee, Demetrius Phalereus, B.C. 317. 
Polysperchon having withdrawn into Epirus, Cassander now entered the Pelo- 
ponnese and won back most of the cities. Hereupon Polysperchon played 
his last stake. Joining his cause with that of Olympias, he invited her to 
accompany him into Macedonia, to the alarm and indignation of Philip Arrhi- 
dseus and his consort, who thereupon sought the aid of Cassander. But 
Olympias was too quick for this combination to take effect. Entering Mace- 
donia in the autumn of B.C. 317, she encountered no opposition. Philip's 
soldiers passed over to her camp, and both he and his consort found them- 
selves at her mercy. Olympias was not apt to spare. Philip Arrhidaeus, his 
wife, Eurydice, Nicanor, the brother of Cassander, and one hundred other 
leading Macedonians were put to death. But the day of retribution was at 



B.C. 

316-296. 



256 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

hand. In the spring of B.C. 316, Cassander quitted Peloponnese, and entering 
Macedonia from Thessaly, besieged Olympias in Pydna, The attempts made 
by Polysperchon to relieve her failed ; and after a few months she was forced 
to surrender herself, and to give over all Macedonia into Cassander's power. 
Soon after, Cassander, though he had promised to spare her life, caused her 
to be executed, after a pretended trial by a pubHc assembly of the Macedonians. 

6. The reign of Cassander over Macedonia, which now com- 
menced, lasted from b. c. 316 to 296, a period of twenty years. 
The talents of this prince are unquestionable, but 
Cassander, his moral conduct fell below that of even the majo- 
rity of his contemporaries, which was sufficiently 
reprehensible. His bad faith towards Olympias was 
followed^ within a few years, by the murders of Roxana and the 
infant Alexander, by complicity in the murder of Hercules, the 
illegitimate son of Alexander the Great, and by treachery towards 
Polysperchon, who was first seduced into crime and then defrauded 
of his reward. Cassander, however, was a clever statesman, a 
good general, and a brave soldier. His first step on obtaining 
possession of Macedonia was to marry Thessalonica, the sister of 
Alexander the Great, and thus to connect himself with the family 
of the conqueror. Next, fearing the ambition of Antigonus, who, 
after his victory over Eumenes, aspired to rule the whole empire 
(see above, Second Period, § 1 3), he entered into the league of the 
satraps against that powerful commander, and bore his part in 
the great war, which commencing b. c. 315, on the return of 
Antigonus from the East, terminated b. c. 301, at the battle of 
Ipsus. In this war Cassander, though he displayed unceasing 
activity, and much ability for intrigue, was on the whole unsuc- 
cessful j and he would probably have lost Greece and Macedonia 
to his powerful adversary, had not the advance of Seleucus from 
Babylon and the defeat of Antigonus at Ipsus saved him. 

Details of tlie War in Europe. The war is divided into two portions 
by the peace of the year B.C. 311, which, practically, was a mere truce for 
a year. — First Portion, B.C. 315 to 312. Antigonus, having made alliance 
with Polysperchon and his son, Alexander, sends Aristodemus of Miletus to 
their assistance, B.C. 314. Cassander wins Alexander to his side, and, after 
his murder, is supported by his widow, Cratesipolis. He makes, however, no 
great impression on the Peloponnese, and in B.C. 313 turns his arms against 
the ^tolian confederacy, which now first appears as an important power, in 
league with Antigonus. Cassander, and his general, Philip, obtain successes in 
this quarter, whereupon Antigonus sends a second expedition into Greece 
(B.C. 312) under his nephew, Ptolemy, and deprives Cassander of all his gains, 
turning the scale decidedly in his own favour. The peace of B.C. 311 fol- 
lows, after which the war is renewed. — Second Portion, B.C. 310 to 301. 
Cassander having murdered the remaining legitimate monarch, Alexander, 



PER. III. PART 111.] MACEDON AND GREECE. 257 

together with his mother, Roxana, gives an opportunity to Polysperchon to 
bring forward Hercules as rightful king of Macedonia, B.C. 310. The Mace- 
donians inclining towards this young prince, Cassander finds himself in con- 
siderable peril ; whereupon he negotiates with Polysperchon, and induces him 
to assassinate his protege, by the promise of establishing him in the government 
of Peloponnesus, a promise never executed. Hercules having been removed, 
B.C. 309, Polysperchon marches southwards, but has to fight his way, Southern 
Greece being greatly disorganised, and Cassander's influence over it but slight. 
This condition of affairs encourages Ptolemy Lagi, hitherto an ally of Cas- 
sander's, to make an expedition into these parts on his own account, and to 
occupy Corinth and Sicyon, B.C. 308. Cassander unwillingly acquiesces in 
this intrusion of a rival. The next year he suffers a more important loss. 
Antigonus sends his son Demetrius (Poliorcetes) into Greece, and orders him 
to proclaim the autonomy of the Greek cities, B.C. 307. Athens receives him 
with open arms. He captures Munychia and Megara, held by Macedonian 
garrisons, enters Athens in triumph, and formally proclaims it free. The 
exigencies of the general struggle summoning Demetrius to other scenes 
(Rhodes, Cyprus, &c.), no further progress is made till the year B.C. 302, 
when he returns to Athens and is once more enthusiastically received. All 
Southern Greece joins him, and in the spring of B.C. 301, he advances into 
Thessaly at the head of an army of 56,000 men, with which he threatens 
Cassander in Macedonia. But at this point Cassander is saved by the danger 
of Antigonus in Asia. Demetrius being recalled by his father, a peace is 
formally concluded, and Demetrius quitting Europe leaves Greece at the mercy 
of his antagonist. 

7. Cassander did not live long to enjoy the tranquillity which 
the defeat and death of Antigonus at Ipsus brought him. He died 
B. c. 298, three years after Ipsus, leaving the crown , 

to the eldest of his three sons by Thessalonice, Cassander. 
Philip. This prince was carried ofF by sickness ^^?|J 
before he had reigned a year: and the Macedonian b.c. 

298—297 

dominions at his death fell to Thessalonice, his 
mother, who made a division of them between her two surviving 
sons, Antipater and Alexander, assigning to the latter Western, 
and to the former Eastern Macedonia. 

8. Antipater, who regarded himself as wronged in the partition, 

having wreaked his vengeance on his mother by causing her to be 

assassinated, applied for aid to his wife's father, ^ . 

^ ^^ ' Reigns of 

Lysimachus ; while Alexander, fearing his brother's Antipater li 
designs, called in the help of Pyrrhus the Epirote Alexander 
and of Demetrius, b.c. 207. Demetrius, after the b.c. 

297—294 

defeat of Ipsus, had still contrived to maintain the 
position of a sovereign. Rejected at first by Athens, he had 
besieged and taken that city, had recovered possession of Attica, 
the Megarid, and great portions of the Peloponnese, and had thus 
possessed himself of a considerable power. Appealed to by 
Alexander, he professed to embrace his cause • but ere long he 

s 



258 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

took advantage of his position to murder the young prince, and 
possess himself of his kingdom. Antipater was about the same 
time put to death by Lysimachus, b. c. 294. 

9. The kingdom of Demetrius comprised, not only Macedonia, 

but Thessaly, Attica, Megaris, and the greater part of the Pelopon- 

Reign of tiese. Had he been content with these territories, he 

Demetrius might have remained quietly in the possession of 
B.C. ' them, for the families of Alexander the Great and of 

294-287. Antipater were extinct, and the connection of Deme- 
trius with Seleucus, who had married his daughter (see above, Third 
Period, Part I, § 5), would have rendered his neighbours cautious 
of meddling with him. But the ambition of Demetrius was 
insatiate, and his self-confidence unbounded. After establishing 
his authority in Central Greece and twice taking Thebes, he 
made an unprovoked attack upon Pyrrhus, b. c. 290, from whom 
he desired to wrest some provinces ceded to him by the late king, 
Alexander. In this attempt he completely failed^ whereupon he 
formed a new project. Collecting a vast army, he let it be under- 
stood that he claimed the entire dominion of his father, Anti- 
gonus, and was about to proceed to its recovery, b. c. 288. 
Seleucus and Lysimachus, whom this project threatened, were 
induced, in consequence, to encourage Pyrrhus to carry his arms 
into Macedonia on the one side, while Lysimachus himself in- 
vaded it on the other. Placed thus between two fires, and finding 
at the same time that his soldiers were not to be depended upon, 
Demetrius, in b. c. 287, relinquished the Macedonian throne, and 
escaped secretly to Demetrias^ the city which he had built on the 
Pagasean Gulf and had made a sort of capital. From hence he 
proceeded on the expedition, which cost him his liberty, against 
Asia. (See above, Third Period^ Part I, § 7.) 

10. On the flight of Demetrius, Pyrrhus of Epirus became king 

of the greater part of Macedonia ; but a share of the spoil was at 

once claimed by Lysimachus, who received the tract 

First reign of ,. . . , . . . . , , 

Pyrrhus, adjoining his own territories. A mere share, how- 
^r.^'1'r.r. cvcr, did not long satisfy the Macedonian chieftain. 

287-286, T-,. ,. ■' 

Finding that the rule of an Epirotic prince was 
distasteful to the Macedonians, he contrived after a little while 
to pick a quarrel with his recent ally, and having invaded his 
Macedonian territories, forced him to relinquish them and retire 
to his own country, after a reign which lasted less than a year. 



PER. III. PAET III.] MACEDON AND GREECE. 259 

11. By the success of Lysimachus, Macedonia became a mere 
appendage to a large kingdom, which reached from the Halys to 
the Pindus range, its centre being Thrace, and its 

capital Lysimacheia in the Chersonese. These circum- Lysimachus, 
stances might not by themselves have alienated the „qq'oqi 
Macedonians, though they could scarcely have failed 
after a time to arouse discontent j but when Lysimachus, after 
suffering jealousy and dissension to carry ruin into his own family, 
proceeded to acts of tyranny and violence towards his nobles and 
other subjects, these last called on Seleucus Nicator to interfere 
for their preservation j and that monarch, having Battle of 
invaded the territories of his neighbour, defeated Corapedion. 
him in the battle of Corupedion, where Lysimachus, fighting with 
his usual gallantry, was not only beaten but slain. 

The domestic relations of Lysimachus, which led to this unhappy result, 
were somewhat comphcated. He was married to Arsinoe, a daughter of 
Ptolemy Lagi by his second wife, Berenice, while his eldest son, Agathocles, 
the issue of an earlier marriage, was married to Lysandra, a daughter of 
Ptolemy by his first wife, Eurydice. Arsinoe, hating her half-sister, persuaded 
her husband that Agathocles was plotting against him, whereupon Lysimachus 
put him to death. The widowed Lysandra fled to Seleucus, accompanied by 
Ptolemy Ceraunus, her brother, who had quitted Egypt through fear of 
Berenice. 

12. By the victory of Corupedion, Seleucus Nicator became 
master of the entire kingdom of Lysimachus, and, with the 
exception of Egypt, appeared to have reunited 

almost the whole of the dominions of Alexander. Seleucus 
But this union was short-lived. Within a few Nicator, 

B.C. 281. 

weeks of his victory, Seleucus was murdered by 
Ptolemy Ceraunus, the Egyptian refugee whom he had protected j 
and the Macedonians, indifferent by whom they were ruled, 
accepted the Egyptian prince without a murmur. 

13. The short reign of Ptolemy Ceraunus (b. c. 381 to 279) was 
stained by crimes and marked by many imprudences. Regarding 
the two sons of Lysimachus by Arsinoe, his half- j^ejgn of 
sister, as possible rivals, he persuaded her into a Ptolemy 

1 1 1 ., 1 • t • Ceraunus, 

marriage^ in order to get her children into his b.c. 

power; and, having prevailed with the credulous 281-279. 
princess, first murdered her sons before her eyes, and then banished 
her to Samothrace. Escaping to Egypt, she became the wife of 
her brother, Philadelphus, and would probably have induced him 
to avenge her wrongs, had not the crime of Ceraunus received its 

s 2 



2 6o MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

just punishment in another way. A great invasion of the Gauls — 

one of those vast waves of migration which from 

tionofthe time to time sweep over the world — occurring just 

Gauls mto g^g Ceraunus felt himself in secure possession of his 
Greece. 

kingdom, disturbed his ease, and called for wise and 

vigorous measures of resistance. Ceraunus met the crisis with 

sufficient courage, but with a complete absence of prudent counsel. 

Instead of organising a united resistance to a common enemy, or 

conciliating a foe whom he was too weak to oppose singly, he 

both exasperated the Gauls by a contemptuous message, and 

refused the proffers of assistance which he received from his 

neighbours. Opposing the unaided force of Macedon to their 

furious onset, he was completely defeated in a great battle, b. c. 

279, and falling into the hands of his enemies was barbarously put 

to death. The Gauls then ravaged Macedonia far and wide ; nor 

was it till B.C. 277 that Macedonia once more obtained a settled 

government. 

The Invasion of the Gauls is one of the most interesting events of the 
post-Alexandrine history. It had permanent effects on Eastern Europe and 
Western Asia, producing among other results the new country of Galatia. We 
may connect the migration to a certain extent with the great movement of 
about a century earlier, which destroyed the Etruscan power in the plain of 
the Po, created Gallia Cisalpina, and caused such great calamities to Rome 
and to most of Italy. Ever since the first lodgment of the Gauls in Northern 
Italy, a migration had been continually in progress. Tribe after tribe crossed 
the Pennine Alps and sought new homes in the sunny south. For a time Italy 
sufficed for the flood of emigrants ; but after a while it was found that no 
further impression could be made on th6 stubborn Etruscan, Latin and Samnite 
nations, and the stream was forced to find a new vent. The Alps were 
recrossed where they curve round the top of the Adriatic ; and Gallic tribes 
occupied the plain of the Danube and its tributaries, dispossessing the previous 
inhabitants, and becoming known either by the general name of Celts, or as 
Scordisci, Cimbri, &c. Probably the battle of Sentinum, B.C. 295, by finally 
closing Italy against Gallic adventure, gave a fresh impulse to the eastward 
flow of the migratory current. At any rate, by the end of the year B.C. 280 
a large mass of hungry immigrants had accumulated in Northern Illyria, and in 
the regions about Mounts Scomius and Scardus. This mass, in B.C. 279, rolled 
forward in three waves, which took three diff'erent directions. One, under 
Cerethrius, took a north-easterly course against the Triballi and the Thracians ; 
another, under Brennus and Acichorius, proceeded due east against the 
Pasonians ; the third, under a chief named Belgius, marched south-east and 
fell upon Macedonia. It was with this last leader and his troops that Ptolemy 
Ceraunus came into contact. Warned by the Dardanian king of the impend- 
ing danger, and offered by him a contingent of 20,000 men, Ceraunus proudly 
rejected the overture, confiding in his own strength. Summoned by the Gallic 
chief to save his kingdom from invasion by an assignment of land and a money 
payment, he made an indignant reply, utterly rejecting the proposition. Inva- 
sion followed as a matter of course, and in the first battle Ceraunus lost both 
his crown and his life. The Gauls then ravaged Macedonia at their will, until 
they were checked by Sosthenes, who had succeeded to the chief authority, 



PER. III. PART III.] MACEDON AND GREECE. 261, 

after Meleager, the brother of Ceraunus, and Antipater, a nephew of Cassander, 
had each held the throne for a few weeks. In the following year, B.C. 278, 
a second and still more formidable irruption of the Gauls took place. Brennus, 
having first invaded Macedonia and defeated Sosthenes, marched into Southern 
Greece, forced the pass of Thermopylae in the same way as the Persians under 
Xerxes, and endeavoured to sack Delphi, but was repulsed and forced to 
retreat. His demoralized army broke up ; and the Gallic hordes generally 
were shattered into mere bands of marauders, which perished by cold, famine, 
or the sword. In Thrace, however, a body contrived to establish a kingdom ; 
and in Asia Minor, the hordes which had crossed over on the invitation of 
Nicomedes, native king of Bithynia (see Period III, Part I, § 9), made them- 
selves masters of Northern Phrygia, B.C. 277, which was thenceforward known 
as Galatia, Other bodies of Gauls took service under the various European 
and Asiatic princes, who found them useful as mercenaries, and employed them 
in the wars which they waged one against another. 

14. On the retirement of the Gauls, Antipater, the nephew of 
Cassander, came forward for the second time, and was accepted as 
king by a portion, at any rate, of the Macedonians. Yxx%i reim of 
But a new pretender soon appeared upon the scene. Antigonus 
Antigonus Gonatas, the son of Demetrius Poliorcetes, b. c. 
who had maintained himself since that monarch's 277-273. 
captivity as an independent prince in Central or Southern Hellas, 
claimed the throne once filled by his father, and, having taken into 
his service a body of Gallic mercenaries, defeated Antipater and 
made himself master of Macedonia. His pretensions being dis- 
puted by Antiochus Soter, the son of Seleucus, who had succeeded 
to the throne of Syria, he engaged in war with that prince, crossing 
into Asia and uniting his forces with those of Nicomedes, the Bithy- 
nian king, whom Antiochus was endeavouring to conquer. To 
this combination Antiochus was forced to yield : relinquishing his 
claims, he gave his sister, Phila, in marriage to Antigonus, and 
recognised him as king of Macedonia. Antigonus upon this fully 
established his power, repulsing a fresh attack of the Gauls, and 
recovering Cassandreia from the cruel tyrant, Apollodorus. 

15. But he was not long left in repose. In B.C. 274, Pyrrhus 
finally quitted Italy, having failed in all his schemes, but having 
made himself a great reputation. Landing in Epirus p i • 

with a scanty force, he found the condition of Mace- Antigonus by 
donia and of Greece favourable to his ambition. yn^us. 
Antigonus had no hold on the affections of his subjects, whose 
recollections of his father, Demetrius, were unpleasing. The Greek 
cities were, some of them, under tyrants, others occupied against 
their will by Macedonian garrisons. Above all, Greece and Mace- 
donia were full of military adventurers, ready to flock to any 



262 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

standard which offered them a fair prospect of plunder. Pyrrhus, 
therefore, having taken a body of Celts into his pay, declared war 
against Antigonus, B.C. 'X']'^^^ and suddenly invaded Macedonia. 
Antigonus gave him battle, but was worsted owing to the disaffec- 
tion of his soldiers, and being twice defeated became a fugitive and 
a wanderer. 

The frequent changes of this period must be ascribed to two principal causes. 
I. The old royal family of the Macedonians having become extinct, none of 
the new houses had as yet obtained a hold on the respect or affections of the 
bulk of the people. One house was regarded as very little better than another. 
None had reigned long enough to obtain d.nj prestige. 2. Mercenaries had come 
to form the main strength of armies ; and mercenaries are at all times 
ready to change sides and desert the leader of to-day, if they fancy that they 
see in his rival a more generous or a more fortunate commander. The Mace- 
donian nation, dispersed over the world, had become weakened ; and its fate 
was now settled for it by Gauls, Thracians, and Illyrians. 

16. The victories of Pyrrhus, and his son Ptolemy, placed the 

Macedonian crown upon the brow of the former, who might not 

Second reign improbably have become the founder of a great 

of Pyrrhus, power, if he could have turned his attention to con- 

273-271. solidation, instead of looking out for fresh conquests. 

His death, gy^ ^]^g g^j-^g gj^j employments of peace had no 
charm for the Epirotic knight-errant. Hardly was he settled in 
his seat, when, upon the invitation of Cleonymus of Sparta, he led 
an expedition into the Peloponnese, and attempted the conquest 
of that rough and difficult region. Repulsed from Sparta, which 
he had hoped to surprise, he sought to cover his disappointment by 
the capture of Argosj but here he was still more unsuccessful. 
Antigonus, now once more at the head of an army, watched the 
city, prepared to dispute its occupation, while the lately threatened 
Spartans hung upon the invader's rear. In a desperate attempt to 
seize the place by night, the adventurous Epirote was first wounded 
by a soldier and then slain by the blow of a tile, thrown from a 
housetop by an Argive woman, b.c. 271. 

Character of Pyrrhus. Amid the bloodthirsty, treacherous, and dissolute 
princes of the post- Alexandrine times, the character of Pyrrhus stands out as 
something by comparison admirable. He was not really either a good or a 
great man. His conduct was often stained with cruelty, and occasionally with 
an insincerity that approached perfidiousness. His aims were purely selfish, 
and show no trace of patriotism. Though his military talent was remarkable, 
his courage great, and circumstances on the whole fairly favourable to him, he 
effected nothing permanent, nothing even grand or considerable. His talents 
strike us as misapplied, and his life as wasted. With a little more solidity and 
singleness of purpose he might have effected much. As it was, his powers 
were frittered away upon unconnected and often ill-judged enterprises. 



PER. III. PART III.] MAdEDON AND GREECE. 263 

17. On the death of Pyrrhus the Macedonian throne was reco- 
vered by Antigonus, who commenced his second reign by establish- 
ing his influence over most of the Peloponnese, after Second reign 
which he was engaged in a long war with the Athe- of Antigonus 
nians (b.c. 368 to 363), who were supported by Sparta u.c. 

and by Egypt. These allies rendered, however, but 271-239. 
little help • and Athens must have soon succumbed, had not Anti 
gonus been called away to Macedonia by the invasion of Alexander, 
son of Pyrrhus. This enterprising prince carried, at first, ail before 
him, and was even acknowledged as Macedonian king- but ere 
long, Demetrius, the son of Antigonus, having defeated Alexander 
near Derdia, re-established his father's dominion over Macedon, 
and, invading Epirus, succeeded in driving the Epirotic monarch 
out of his paternal kingdom. The Epirots soon restored him j but 
from this time he remained at peace with Antigonus, who was 
able once more to devote his undivided attention to the subjugation 
of the Greeks. In b.c. 363, he took Athens, and rendered himself 
complete master of Attica; and, in b.c. 344, nineteen years after- 
wards, he contrived by a treacherous stratagem to . , . 
obtain possession of Corinth. But at this point his ^vith 
successes ceased. A power had been quietly growing ^^L^^^e^" 
up in a corner of the Peloponnese which was to 
become a counterpoise to Macedonia, and to give to the closing 
scenes of Grecian history an interest little inferior to that which 
had belonged to its earlier pages. The Achxan League, resuscitated 
from its ashes about the time of the invasion of the Gauls, b.c. 380, 
had acquired in the space of thirty-seven years sufficient strength 
and consistency to venture on defying the puissant king of Macedon 
and braving his extreme displeasure. In b.c. 343, Aratus, the 
general of the League and in a certain sense its founder, by a sudden 
and well-planned attack surprised and took Corinth ; which imme- 
diately joined the League, whereto it owed its freedom. This 
success was followed by others. Megara, Troezen, and Epidaurus 
threw off their allegiance to Antigonus and attached themselves to 
the League in the course of the same year. Athens and Argos were 
threatened ; and the League assumed an attitude of unmistakable 
antagonism to the power and pretensions of Macedon. Antigonus, 
grown timorous in his old age, met the bold aggressions of the 
League with no overt acts of hostility. Contenting himself with 
inciting the iEtolians to attack the new power, he remained 



264 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

wholly on the defensive, neither attempting to recover the lost 
towns, nor to retaliate by any invasion of Achsea. 

Rise and Growth of the Achaean League. The old confederacy of 
the twelve Achsean cities, which has been already spoken of (see above, 
Book III, Period II, Part II, § A), appears to have been dissolved soon after 
the death of Alexander, by the influence of the Macedonian princes, especially 
Cassander and Demetrius— about B.C. 300 to 290. It was not long wholly in 
abeyance. About B.C. 280, the cities began to draw together again, a league 
being formed between Patrse and Dyme, which was joined almost immediately 
by Pharse and Tritsea. Five years later, B.C. 275, ^gium, Bura, and 
Ceryneia came in, expelling their Macedonian garrisons or their tyrants ; and 
soon afterwards the other three surviving cities of the original twelve, -iEgeira, 
PeUene, and Leontium (Helice and Olenus had ceased to exist) were recovered ; 
and the whole of Achsea was thereby once more united into a single political 
unit. Thus far the movement had no great importance, being simply the 
re-formation of an old community which had never previously played an import- 
ant part in Grecian affairs. A new character was given to the League, and the 
foundation of its greatness laid in B. c. 251, when Aratus, the liberator of Sicyon 
from tyranny, induced that wholly separate and indeed alien state to ask, and 
the Achseans to grant, its admission into the confederacy. By adopting the 
principle that foreign states might be received into the League, and become 
members of it on terms of equality with the several Achaean towns, an indefinite 
power of expansion was given to the union, which became in principle, and 
might become in fact, Pan-Hellenic. These consequences were not, perhaps, 
at once generally seen; but when, in B.C. 243, Aratus, the general of the 
League, threw down the gauntlet to Antigonus, captured his town of Corinth, 
and induced it to join the confederation, and further proceeded to accept as 
additional members the revolted cities of Megara, Epidaurus, and Troszen, the 
existence of a new and formidable power in Southern Greece was fully 
revealed, and only the wilfully blind would fail to perceive it. The after- 
growth of the League, its extension to Cleonse, Gynsetha, Stymphalus, Cleitor, 
Pheneus, Caphyse, Hersea, Telphusa, Megalopolis, jEgina, Hermione, Argos, 
Phlius, was the natural result of the principle asserted in B.C. 251, a principle 
new to Greece at the time, and of the greatest importance to her, since its 
general adoption might have saved her from annihilation. Unfortunately, the 
old love of separate independence, and the old spirit of jealousy and rivalry, 
prevented the adoption of the principle from being general ; and its partial 
acceptance could not avail greatly. Still, even this partial acceptance deferred 
for a time the absorption of Greece by a foi-eign power ; and it shed a glory 
around the period of her decline and fall, which recalls in some degree the 
splendour of those days when she rose to greatness. 

Chief Features of the Constitution. 1. Equality of the federated cities, 
each of which had one vote only in the Federal Congress. 2. Complete inter- 
nal independence of the several states, which had the exclusive ordering of their 
own domestic affairs and appointment of their own local magistrates and 
governors. 3. Management of the affairs of the League by a General Congress, 
which met regularly twice a year at some city of the League (at first ^gium, 
afterwards Corinth or Argos), and might be summoned to hold extraordinary 
meetings by the chief magistrate at other times. This congress consisted, not 
of deputies from the states, but of all the citizens of the states who chose to 
attend. It appointed the Council (i3ovXj^), a committee of its own body, who 
prepared measures previously to their submission to the General Congress, 
received and conferred with ambassadors, and the like ; it also appointed the ten 
Ministers (Srjfiiovpyoi), who formed the Council of the head of the state ; and the 
head of the state himself (a-Tparrjyos^ who united the chief military with the 
chief civil authority. 4. Constitution in theory democratic ; but practical ten- 
dency towards an aristocracy of wealth, in consequence of offices being unpaid, 



PER. III. PART III.] MACEDON AND GREECE. 265 

and the citizens having to travel at their own expense in order to attend the 
general meetings of the Congress. 5. Great power of the Strategus or 
General, who not only had the entire direction of the armed force, but in 
practice for the most part guided the whole policy of the League. Restriction 
on his re-election, which could only take place, legally, every other year. 

The following works on the subject of the Achaean League are deserving of 
attention : — 

Merleker, G. F., Achaicorum libri tres. Darmstadt, 1837 ; 8vo. 

SCHORN, Geschichte Griechenlands von der Entstehung des j^tolischen und Ach'di- 
schen Biindes bis auf die Zerstormig Korinths. Bonn, 1833 ; 8vo. 

Helwing, Geschichte des Ach'aischen Bundes. Lemgo, 1829 ; 8vo. 

Freeman, E. A., History of Federal Go-vernment, vol. i. chaps, v.-ix. 

18. Antigonus Gonatas died b.c. 239, at the age of eighty, 
having reigned in all thirty-seven years. He left his crown to his 
son, Demetrius 11, who inherited his ambition with- 

rx-ii r r r^ • Reign of 

out his talents. The first acts of Demetrius were to Demetrius II, 
form a close alliance with Epirus, now under the oqo'ooq 
rule of Olympias, Alexander's widow; to accept the 
hand of her daughter Phthia, whereby he offended his queen, Stra- 
tonice, and through her Seleucus, the Syrian king j and to break 
with the ^tolians, who were seeking at this time to deprive 
Olympias of a portion of her dominions. The ^^tolians, alarmed, 
sought the alliance of the Achaean League ; and in the war which 
followed, Demetrius was opposed by both these important 
powers. He contrived, however, to defeat Aratus in Thessaly, to 
reduce Boeotia_, and to re-establish Macedonian ascendancy as far 
as the Isthmus. But this was all that he could effect. No impres- 
sion was made by his arms on either of the great Leagues. No 
aid was given to Epirus, where the royal family was shortly after- 
wards exterminated. Demetrius was perhaps recalled to Macedonia 
by the aggressive attitude of the Dardanians^ who certainly attacked 
him in his later years, and gave him a severe defeat. It is thought 
by some that he perished in the battle. But this is uncertain. 

The assertion of Porphyry in Eusebius, that Demetrius II conquered Libya 
and Gyrene, is untrue, and arises from a confusion between him and one of 
his uncles. Macedonia was far too weak at this time for any such enterprise. 

The most important fact of this period was the interference, noav/br the first 
time, of the Romans in the affairs of Greece. The embassy to 
the iEtolians, warning them against interference with Acarnania, . ^ ^ ^ 

belongs probably to the year B.C. 238 ; that to the ^tolians ^ Rq^^'^^ 
and Achseans, announcing the success of the Roman arms -^^ Grecian 
against the lUyrians, belongs certainly to B.C. 228. In the affairs 

same year, or the year preceding, Corcyra, ApoUonia, and 
Epidamnus became Roman dependencies. 

19. Demetrius left an only son, Philip, who was but eight years 
old at his decease. He was at once acknowledged king j but owing 



2 66 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

to his tender age, his guardianship was undertaken by his kinsman. 
Regency of Antigonus, the son of his father's first cousin, 
Antigonus Dcmetrius ' the Handsome/ It was^ consequently, 
B.C. ' this prince who directed the policy of Macedonia 
229-220. during the period which immediately followed on the 
death of Demetrius II — who^ in fact, ruled Macedonia for nine 
years, from b.c. 3:^9 to 330. The events of this period are of first- 
rate interest, including, as they do, the last display of patriotism 
and vigour at Sparta, and the remarkable turn of affairs whereby 
Macedonia, from being the deadly foe of the Achsean League, 
became its friend, ally, and protector. 

Condition of Sparta at this period. The Spartan constitution had 
remained unchanged in form from the time of the Messenian Wars (see 
„, pp. 130, 131) to the period which we have now reached^-a 

anges at space of above four centuries. A project of revolution, con- 
the\hiie"of ^^i^ed by Ginadon, B.C. 399, had been discovered before it 
TheopomDus could be put in execution, and had proved abortive. But, 
though no formal or violent change had occurred, a subtle 
gradual alteration had destroyed the ideal of Lycurgus. The chief points of 
this alteration were the following: — {a) Diminution of the number of the 
citizens by the operation of the laws which always cause an aristocracy, that 
does not recruit itself from without, to become more and more contracted. 
{h) Further and still more striking diminution of the number of full citizens, 
by the operation of the Lycurgean law limiting citizenship to Spartans of inde- 
pendent means, (c) Concentration of wealth, and especially of landed property, 
in a few hands, partly by the practice of marrying heiresses to wealthy men, 
partly by the permission to deal freely with landed estates by gift, sale, or will 
obtained by the law of Epitadeus. {d) Constant encroachment of the Ephors 
on the power of the kings, and final reduction of the latter to mere ciphers. 
ii) Relaxation of the Lycurgean discipline. Abandonment by the citizens 
generally of the old simple and frugal rule of life, and adoption by the wealthy 
of habits of luxury. (/") Contraction of heavy debts by the poorer members 
of the state, who were thus placed at the mercy of a small class of wealthy 
capitalists. The result of the whole was that the entire number of adult male 
Spartans did not exceed 700 ; and of these not more than 1 00 were in possession of 
the full rights of citizens. This narrow oligarchy was occupied almost exclu- 
sively with the difficulties of its own position ; and Sparta consequently stood 
aloof from Grecian politics, and had done so since the attempt of Agis III, in 
B.C. 330. Even insults were tamely submitted to; and when I llyrian pirates 
ravaged the coast, or ^tolian marauders the interior, no vengeance was 
exacted. Under these circumstances the idea of a reform arose. It was pro- 
P r posed to increase the number of citizens to 4,500 by admitting 

^ ^^^^^ Perioeci and foreigners ; to re-dinjide the land of the state in 
Ams equal allotments to these persons and to 15,000 selected 

Laconians ; to abolish debts • and to re-establish the syssitia 
and the rest of the Lycurgean discipline. A first attempt to carry out the 
reform, made by Agis, B.C. 244 to 241, met with only partial success, being 
frustrated by the treachery of the Ephor, Agesilaiis, and the open opposition 
of the other king, Leonidas, who returned from the exile into which Agis had 
driven him, and placed himself at the head of the counter-revolution. Agis 
fell a martyr to his reforming zeal ; and the old state of things was re-established 
B.C. 241, But five years later Leonidas died, and was succeeded by his son, 
Cleomenes, B.C. 236, who had married Agis's widow, Agiatis. Under her 



PEB. III. PART III.] MACEDON AND GREECE. 267 

influence the young monarch revived the projects of Agis, and, having first 
acquired a great military reputation in a war with the Achasan League, 
succeeded in eifecting their accomplishment, B.C. 226. At ^ .. , 
the same time, he abolished the Ephoralty, modified the cha- , Cleomenes 
racter of the Senate (yepowo-t'n), and practically destroyed the 
double monarchy by making his own brother, Euclides, second king. A glorious 
period for Sparta followed. Not only were the forces of the Achaean League 
defeated, but Argos, the ancient rival of Sparta, submitted to ^ ^ 

her ; Corinth, revolting from the Achseans, placed herself under cleomenes 
Spartan protection ; Epidaurus, Hermione, Troezen, and most 
of Arcadia did the same ; and even Pellene, one of the ten Achsean towns, was 
occupied, and received a Lacedaemonian garrison, B.C. 224 to 223. But the 
tide soon after turned. The animating spirit of the Achaean League, Aratus, 
in his jealousy of Cleomenes, took the traitorous step of calling in Antigonus 
to his aid, and agreed to reinstate him in the possession of the Acrocorinthus. 
The result was fatal at once for Greece and for Cleomenes. The Achaean 
League lost its character as the defender of Greek liberty, and to a great 
extent broke up. Cleomenes, forced to stand upon the defen- „ .,1 r 
sive, was attacked and defeated at Sellasia, B. c. 2 2 1, and became ^^ ^.° 
a fugitive at the court of Ptolemy. The reaction triumphed ^ ^ 22i' 
at Sparta, and her last chance of recovering her ancient glory 
was lost. Macedonia was once more supreme over almost all Greece, the only 
parts unsubdued being ^toUa, Messenia, and Elis. All the efforts of Aratus to 
raise up a power in Greece which might counterbalance Macedon, and of 
Agis and Cleomenes to regenerate their country and make her the fitting head 
of a free Hellas, had ended in simply delivering Greece up, bound hand and 
foot, into the power of her great enemy. 

20. The other wars of Antigonus Doson were comparatively 
unimportant. He repulsed an attack of the Dardanians, who had 
defeated his predecessor, suppressed an insurrection 

in Thessaly, and made an expedition by sea against of Antigonus 
South- Western Asia Minor, which is said to have °^°"' 

resulted in the conquest of Caria. It was impossible, however, 
that he should long hold this distant dependency, which shortly 
reverted to Egypt, the chief maritime power of this period. Soon 
after his return from Greece, Antigonus died of disease, having 
held the sovereignty for the space of nine years. He was succeeded 
by the rightful heir to the throne, Philip, the son of Demetrius II, 
in whose name he had carried on the government. 

21. Philip, who was still no more than seventeen years old, was 
left by his kinsman to the care of tutors and guardians. He 
seemed to ascend the throne at a favourable moment, 

when Macedonia, at very little expenditure of either phihp m, 
men or money, had recovered Greece, had repulsed her ^- ^- 

Illyrian adversaries, and was released, by the death of 
Ptolemy Euergetes, from her most formidable enemy among the suc- 
cessors of Alexander. But all these advantages were neutralised by 
the rash conduct of the king himself, who first allied himself with 



268 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS, [book iv. 

Hannibal against Rome, and then with Antiochus against Egypt. 
No doubt Philip saw, more clearly than most of his contemporaries, 
the dangerously aggressive character of the Roman power j nor can 
we blame him for seeking to form coalitions against the conquering 
republic. But, before venturing to make Rome his enemy, he 
should have consolidated his power at home j and, when he made 
the venture, he should have been content with no half measures, 
but should have thrown himself, heart and soul, into the quarrel. 

22. The first war in which the young prince engaged was one 
that had broken out between the Achseans and ^Etolians. The 

War of the -^tolians, who now for the first time show them- 
Leagues. selves a really first-rate Greek power, had been 
gradually growing in importance, from the time when they pro- 
voked the special anger of Antipater in the Lamian War {supra^ 
p. 253), and were threatened with transplantation into Asia. Some- 
what earlier than this they had organised themselves into a Federal 
Republic, and had thus set the example which the Achaeans 
followed half a century afterwards. Some account of their institu- 
tions, and of the extent of their power, is requisite for the proper 
understanding both of their strength and of their weakness. 

The rise of the League belongs probably to the reign of Alexander, when 
the various tribes, who had previously only acted together upon certain occa- 

^r . r sions, formed a permanent union, with a view (probably) of 

the^tolian "maintaining their independence. The union, which was 
League. originally one of tribes, not of cities, involved (a) the institu- 
tion of the ' Pan-iEtolicum ' or General Assembly of all 
^tolians, which met regularly once a year — commonly at Thermon — for the 
discussion of business and election of officers,- and might also be convened, as 
often as was thought to be desirable, by the chief magistrate ; (^) the nomination 
of a select Council (a7rd/cA>?7ot), consisting seemingly of 1,000 members, no doubt 
appointed by the Assembly, which performed the ordinary functions of a 
Greek council or senate ; (/) the creation of a Chief of the League, a federal 
head, who was elected annually by the Assembly at its regular meeting, and of 
two other great officers, elected in the same way, a Commander of Cavalry 
(j.Tnr6.pxr]s), and a Secretary (ypaixfxaTevs) ; and {d) the election of certain 
officers called ' Synedri ' and ' Nomographi,' whose duties are uncertain. 
After the League had existed for some little time, it began to be aggressive 
and to spread itself. CEniadas was annexed while Alexander was engaged in 

Extent of the ^^^^ '. Heracleia in Trachis, at the time of the great Gallic 
League invasion {supra, p. 260). Afterwards Acarnania, Western 
Locris, Doris, Southern Thessaly, Achaea Phthiotis, several 
cities of Arcadia, Cius on the Propontis, and the islands of Teos and Cephallenia 
joined the League voluntarily, or were forced into it ; and it even at one time 
had relations with Bosotia, which almost amounted to incorporation. It thus 
stretched across Central Greece from the Ionian to the jEgean Sea, comprising 
also islands in both seas, and other still more remote dependencies. It was not, 
however, the principle of the League to admit, generally, foreign states on terms 
of equality. This may have been done in some instances ; but usually the 
relation established was one of inequality — inequality varying in degree from 



PEE. III. PART III.] MACEDON AND GREECE. 269 

mere inferiority of dignity to absolute subjection. This is one of the most 
marked differences between the iEtolian League and that of ^ 
Achaea. Another difference is to be traced in the wilder thT^Etolian 
character and inferior Hellenism of the ^Etolians, who never ^^^ Achjean 
quite emerged out of the state of barbarity described by Leagues. 
Thucydides, but continued a robber nation to the end. ^tolia 
had at no time any patriotic aims — she wished simply her own aggrandisement. 
In her wars, what she mainly sought was plunder, and her expeditions were 
generally raids for the sake of carrying off spoil. To gain her ends, she was 
ready to wink at any infringement of international law and to ally herself with 
any power. On two occasions only did she do good service to Greece, in the 
Lamian War and at the great Gallic inroad, her conception of her own interests 
on these occasions happening to coincide with the interests of Hellas. She 
joined with Epirus to crush Acarnania, and was ready to join with Macedon 
to partition Achaea. Finally, she brought the Romans in upon Greece by a 
formal treaty of alliance, entering into a treasonable partnership with the 
foreign power which the Greeks had most to fear, and obtaining the aid of 
Roman fleets and armies to help her against her Hellenic adversaries. It is 
further remarkable that iEtolia never produced a great man. While Achaea 
had her Aratus, her Lydiades, and her Philopoemen, all of them men who 
would have been remarkable at any period of Grecian history, jEtolia could 
produce nothing higher than a Dorimachus or a Scopas, successful robbers on 
a par with Philomelus and Onomarchus, but with no pretensions to the 
character of either generals or statesmen. 

BrandSTAETER, F. a., Geschichte des atolischen Landes und Volkes. Berlin, 
1844 ; 8vo. 

23. The war of the ^Etolians and Achgeans was provoked by 
the former, who thought they saw in the accession of so young 
a prince as Philip to the throne of Macedon a Successful 
favourable opportunity for advancing their interests P^^,tf.'^^? 

^^ J o by Phuip m 

after their own peculiar method. It commenced the ^tolo- 
with the invasion of Messenia, and would probably ^^^'^^^ War. 
have been ruinous to Achaea, had Philip allowed himself to be 
detained in Macedonia by apprehensions of danger from his 
Illyrian neighbours, or had he shown less vigour and ability in 
his proceedings after he entered Greece. Though thwarted by 
the treachery of his minister and guardian, Apelles, who was 
jealous of the influence of Aratus, and but little aided by any of 
his Greek allies, he gained a series of brilliant successes, over- 
running most of T^tolia, capturing Thermon, the capital, detach- 
ing from the League Phigaleia in Arcadia and the Phthian Thebes, 
and showing himself in all respects a worthy successor of the old 
Macedonian conquerors. But after four years of this successful 
warfare, he allowed himself to be diverted from what should have 
been his first object, the complete reduction of Greece, by the pros- 
pect which opened upon him after Hannibal's victory at Lake 
Thrasimene. At the instance of Demetrius of Pharos he concluded 



2 70 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

a peace with the TEtolians on the principle of utt possedetls^ and, 
retiring into Macedonia, entered upon those negotiations which 
involved him shortly afterwards in a war with Rome. 

Details of the .ffitolo-Aelisean "War. Incursion of the vEtolians through 
Achaa into Messenia under Scopas and Dorimachus, and plundering expedi- 
tions by sea at the same time against Acarnania and Epirus, B.C. 220. Defeat 
of Aratus at Caphyse. The ^tolians capture Cynastha. Advance of Philip, 
B.C. 219. He invades Ji^tolia and captures Pseanium and (Eniadse, but is 
recalled to Macedon by a rumoured incursion of the Dardanians. Having 
terrified the Dardanians into submission, he returns during the winter into 
Greece, enters Peloponnese, defeats the ^tolian general, Euripidas, takes 
Psophis, overruns Elis, receives the submission of Phigaleia, and finally rests 
his army for the remainder of the winter at Argos, B.C. 218. In the early 
spring, having collected a fleet, he sails to Cephallenia and besieges Pale, but 
fails to take it owing to the treachery of Apelles. Crossing to Acarnania, he 
invades -^tolia from the north-west, and, marching into the very centre of the 
country, takes and destroys Thermon, the capital, defeats every force which 
attempts to oppose him, and proceeding to Corinth, enters the Peloponnese 
and ravages the whole territory of Sparta, as far as Malea and Tasnarum. On 
his return, he defeats Lycurgus, the Spartan king, near Sparta. Winter ap- 
proaching, he returns to Macedonia, and capture,s Bylazora in Pseonia, a city 
commanding the passes into Macedonia from the country of the Dardanians. 
In the spring of B.C. 217, he advances into Thessaly, besieges and takes 
Phthian Thebes, and thence proceeds to Argos to be present at the Nemean 
Games. Here the news of the battle of Lake Thrasimene reaches him, and 
he consents to peace. 

The history of this war has been written by Merleker. See his Geschichte 
des jEtolisch-Ach'dischen Bundesgenossen Krieges, nach den Quellen dargestellt. 
Konigsberg, 183 1; Svo. 

It is also given in considerable detail by Thirlwall, History of Greece, vol. 
viii. chap. Ixiii. 

24. The negotiations opened by Philip with Hannibal, B.C. 216, 

interrupted by the capture of his ambassadors, were brought to 

First war of ^ successful issuc in B.C. 215; and in the ensuing 

Philip with year Philip began his first war with Rome by the 

the Romans, •' . ^ f „ . , , • ^ -r. • ti, 

B.C. siege of ApoUonia, the chief Roman port in llly- 

214-207. ricum. By securing this place, he expected to faci- 
litate the invasion of Italy on which he was bent, and to prepare 
the way for that complete expulsion of the Romans from the 
eastern coast of the gulf, which was one of the objects he had 
most at heart. But he soon learnt that the Romans were an 
enemy with whom, under any circumstances whatever, it was 
dangerous to contend. Defeated by M. Valerius, who surprised 
his camp at night, he was obliged to burn his ships and make 
a hasty retreat. His schemes of invasion were rudely overthrown j 
and, three years later, b. c. 211, the Romans, by concluding a 
treaty with ^Etolia and her allies (Elis, Sparta, the Illyrian chief, 



PER. III. PART III.] MACEDON AND GREECE. 271 

Scerdilaidas, and Attalus, king of Pergamus), gave the war a new- 
character, transferring it into Philip's own dominions, and so 
occupying him there that he was forced to implore aid from 
Carthage instead of bringing succour to Hannibal. After many 
changes of fortune, the Macedonian monarch, having by the hands 
of his ally, Philopoemen, defeated the Spartans at Mantineia, 
induced the ^tolians to conclude a separate peace ; after which 
the Romans, anxious to concentrate all their energies on the war 
with Carthage, consented to a treaty on terms not dishonourable 
to either party. 

Details of the First Roman "War. The Romans (b.c. 211) conqiier 
Zacynthus, OEniadse, and Nesos, and deliver them over to the iEtoIians. Phihp 
is engaged with wars at home against the Illyrians and Thracians. The next 
year (b.c. 210) the Romans take Anticyra in Locris, and the island of 
iEgina, and hand them over in like manner. Philip advances to Malis, and 
besieges Echinus, which he takes, despite an attempt of the Romans and 
^tolians to relieve it. In B.C. 209, Philopoemen appears upon the scene and 
commences those reforms by which he gave new life and vigour to Achsea. 
On the other side Attalus arrives from Asia, and co-operates with the Romans 
and iEtolians. Philip now marches southward, and, entering the Pelopon- 
nese, defeats a Roman detachment in Achsea, and invades Elis, but is there 
defeated by Sulpicius Galba and narrowly escapes with his life. The opera- 
tions of the next year, B.C. 208, were unimportant. The chief event was the 
recall of Attalus, who was forced to return to Asia in order to repel an attack 
made upon his kingdom by his neighbour, Prusias of Bithynia. Nearly of equal 
importance was the appointment of Philopoemen to the Headship of Achsea, 
which produced in the year following, B.C. 207, the victory of Mantineia, and 
placed Philip on that vantage-ground which enabled him to dictate terms to 
the Achaeans, and to conclude his peace with the Romans on conditions which 
were fairly equal. 

25. Philip had now a breathing-space, and might have employed 
it to consolidate his power in Macedonia and Greece, before the 
storm broke upon him which was manifestly im- 

„ , . ... , , War with 

pending. But his ambition was too great, and his Egypt, 
views were too grand, to allow of his engaging in the R^^o^j^^^ 
a work so humble and unexciting as consolidation. b. c. 

203—200 

The Macedonian monarch had by this time dis- 
appointed all his earlier promise of virtue and moderation. He 
had grown profligate in morals, criminal in his acts, both public 
and private, and strangely reckless in his policy. Grasping after 
a vast empire, he neglected to secure what he already possessed, 
and, while enlarging the bounds, he diminished the real strength 
of his kingdom. It became now his object to extend his domi- 
nion on the side of Asia, and with this view he first (about 
B. c. 205) concluded a treaty with Antiochus the Great for the 



272 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

partition of the territories of Egypt, and then (b. c. 203) plunged 

into a war with Attalus and the Rhodians. His own share of 

the Egyptian spoils was to comprise Lysimacheia and the adjoining 

parts of Thrace, Samos, Ephesus, Caria, and perhaps other portions 

of Asia Minor. He began at once to take possession of these 

places. A war with Attalus and Rhodes was almost the necessary 

result of such proceedings, since their existence depended on the 

maintenance of a balance of power in these parts, and the instinct 

of self-preservation naturally threw them on the Egyptian side. 

Philips moreover, took no steps to disarm their hostility : on the 

contrary, before war was declared, he burnt the arsenal of the 

Rhodians by the hands of an emissary • and in the war itself, one 

of his opening acts was to strengthen Prusias, the enemy of 

Attalus, by making over to him the ^Etolian dependency, Cius. 

The main event of the war was the great defeat of his fleet by the 

combined squadrons of the two powers off Chios^ b. c. 201, a defeat 

ill compensated by the subsequent victory of Lade. Still Philip 

was on the whole successful, and accomplished the main objects 

which he had in view, making himself master of Thasos, Samos, 

Chios, of Caria, and of many places in Ionia. Unassisted by 

Egypt, the allies were too weak to protect her territory, and Philip 

obtained the extension of dominion which he had desired, but at 

the cost of provoking the intense hostility of two powerful naval 

states, and the ill-will of iEtolia, which he had injured by his 

conquest of Cius. 

'x6. These proceedings of Philip' in the^gean had, moreover, been 

well calculated to bring about a rupture of the peace with Rome. 

^ ^ Friendly relations had existed between the Romans 

Rupture ■' 

with Rome, and Egypt from the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus 
^■^' ■ {supra, p. 341), and even from an earlier date Rhodes 
and Rome had been on terms of intimacy. Attalus was an 
actual ally of Rome, and had been included in the late treaty. 
It is therefore not surprising that in b. c. 200 Rome remon- 
strated, and, when Philip rejected every demand, declared the 
peace at an end and renewed the war. 

27. The Second War of Philip with Rome is the turning-point 

Second War ^^ ^^^ history of Ancient Europe, deciding^ as it did,' 

of Philip the question whether Macedon and Rome should 

B.C. ' continue two parallel forces, dividing between them 

200-197. the general direction of European ajEFairs, or whether 



PER. III. PART III.] MACEDON AND GREECE. 273 

the power of the former should be completely swept away, and 
the dominion of the latter over the civilised West finally and 
firmly established. It is perhaps doubtful what the result would 
have been, if Philip had guided his conduct by the commonest 
rules of prudence j if, aware of the nature of the conflict into 
which he was about to be plunged, he had conciliated instead 
of alienating his natural supports, and had so been able to 
meet Rome at the head of a general confederacy of the Hellenes. 
As it was, Greece was at first divided, the Rhodians, Athenians, 
and Athamanians siding with Rome ; ^tolia, Epirus, Achaea, 
and Sparta being neutral ; and Thessaly, Boeotia, Allies of 
Acarnania, Megalopolis, and Argos supporting Philip j ^^^^^r P^rty. 
while in the latter part of the war, after Flamininus had pro- 
claimed himself the champion of Grecian freedom, almost the 
entire force of Hellas was thrown on the side of the Romans. 
Rome had also the alliance of the Illyrian tribes, always hostile 
to their Macedonian neighbours, and of Attains, king of Pergamus. 
Philip was left at last without a friend or ally, excepting Acar- 
nania, which exhibited the unusual spectacle of a grateful nation 
firmly adhering to its benefactor in his adversity. 

Details of the Second Roman War. Sulpicius Galba lands in Epirus, 
B.C. 200, and early the next year, in concert with the Dardanians and Illyrians, 
attacks Macedonia on the land side, while the Roman fleet, with the con- 
tingents of Attalus and the Rhodians, threatens the sea-board. Galba 
gains some advantages, but makes no very serious impression. The fleet 
takes Andros and Oreus in Eubcea. Towards winter jEtolia joins the Roman 
side, and her troops invade Thessaly, where they are defeated by Philip near 
Pharcadon. In B.C. 198 the consul, Villius, landing in Epirus late in the 
year, effects nothing, but T, Quinctius Flamininus, his successor, defeats Philip 
on the Aous, and, proclaiming liberty to the Greeks, proceeds through Thes- 
saly into Phocis, besieging only the towns held by Macedonian garrisons. The 
fleet takes Eretria and Carystus in Euboea. Achaea and Boeotia join the 
Romans. Philip makes alliance with Nabis, and gives him 
Argos. In B.C. 197, Flamininus, having wintered at Thebes, Battle of 
invaded Thessaly and met Philip at Cynocephalse, where he ^-ynocejAalse, 
completely defeated him. This battle decided the war, ^'^' 
and with it the fate of Macedonia. Philip at once consented to terms 
of peace. 

28. The terms of peace agreed to by Philip after the battle of 
Cynocephalae were the following : — (i) He was to evacuate all the 
Greek cities which he held, whether in Europe or ^ 

-' ^ Terms oi 

Asia, some immediately, the others within a given peace granted 
time i (2) He was to surrender his state-galley and ^° ^^^ ^^' 
all his navy except five light ships j (3) He was to restore all the 
Roman prisoners and deserters- and (4) He was to pay to the 



2 74 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

Romans i,ooo talents, 500 at once, the rest in ten annual instal- 
ments. He was also to abstain from all aggressive war, and to 
surrender any claim to his revolted province, Orestis. These 
terms, though hard, were as favourable as he had any right to 
expect. Had the ^tolians been allowed to have their way, he 
would have been far more severely treated. 

39. The policy of Rome in proclaiming freedom to the Greeks, 

and even withdrawing her garrisons from the great fortresses of 

„ , , Demetrias, Chalcis, and Corinth — the 'fetters of 

Settlement of ' ' 

Greece, Greece' — was undoubtedly sound. Greek freedom 
B. c. 194. could not be maintained excepting under her pro- 
tection; and, by undertaking the protectorate, she attached the 
bulk of the Greek people to her cause. At the same time, the 
establishment of universal freedom prevented any state from having 
much power ; and in the quarrels that were sure to ensue Rome 
would find her advantage. 

The chief features of the settlement of Greece made by Flamininus, B.C. 194, 
were the subdivision of states and the establishment of separate independence. 
Perrhsebia, Dolopia, and Magnesia were detached from Thessaly and erected 
into independent communities. In Euboea, Oreus, Eretria, and Carystus were 
made free towns. Argos was detached from Sparta, and became once more 
her own mistress. The Leagues of Achaea and ^tolia were not, however, 
dissolved, but were left to balance each other. Achsea even received back 
some of her lost states, as Corinth, Hersea, and Triphylia. Greece generally 
seems to have been content with the arrangement made, but it wholly failed 
to satisfy the iEtolians. 

30. War broke out in Greece in the very year of Flamininus' 
departure, B.C. 194, by the intrigues of the vEtolians, who en- 
couraged Nabis to attack the Achaeans^ then mur- 

with ^tolia, dered Nabis, and finally invited Antiochus over 
from Asia. The defeat of Antiochus at Thermopylae, 
B.C. 191 (supra J p. 224), left the ^tolians to bear 
the brunt of the war which they had provoked, and after the battle 
of Magnesia, b. c. 190, there was nothing left for them but com- 
plete submission. Rome curtailed their territory, and made them 
subject-allies, but forbore to crush them utterly, since they might 
still be useful against Macedonia. 

31. The degradation of ^Etolia was favourable to the growth 
Growth of ^^^ advancement of the Achaean League, which at 

the Achaean one and the same time was patronised by Rome, 

eague. ^^^ seemed to patriotic Greeks the only remaining 

rallying point for a national party. The League at this time was 



B.C. 

194-190. 



PEE. III. PAET III.] MACEDON AND GREECE. 275 

under the guidance of the able and honest Philopoemen, whose 
efforts for its extension were crowned with remarkable success. 
After the murder of Nabis by the vEtolians, Sparta was induced 
to join the League, b. c. 193; and, a year later, the last of 
the Peloponnesian states which had remained separate, Messene 
and Elis, came in. The League now reached its widest territorial 
extent, comprising all the Peloponnese, together with Megara, 
and other places, beyond its limits. 

The annexation of Sparta, though legally effected, was an injudicious 
measure ; and its compulsory retention in the League, after it had shown plainly 
its wish to secede, was a fatal mistake. Messene, on the other hand, though 
by the murder of Philopoemen it seemed to be intensely hostile, was rightly 
retained, since there the opponents of union were a mere faction. 

32. After the conclusion of his peace with Rome, Philip for 
some years remained quiet. But having assisted the Romans in 
their struggle with Antiochus and the T^tolians, he ^ , , 

°'^ II- Troubles of 

was allowed to extend his dominions by wars, not Philip's 
only with Thrace, but also with the Dolopians, closing years. 
Athamanians, and even the Thessalians and Magnesians. When, 
however, his assistance was no longer needed, Rome required him 
to give up all his conquests and retire within the limits of Mace- 
donia. Prolonged negotiations followed, until at last (b. c. 183) 
the Senate was induced to relax in their demands by the mediation 
of Demetrius, Philip's second son, long a hostage at Rome, for 
whom they professed to have a warm regard. The favour openly 
shown towards this prince by the Roman government was not 
perhaps intended to injure him j but it naturally had that result. 
It roused the suspicion of his father and the jealousy of his elder 
brother, Perseus, and led to the series of accusations against the 
innocent youth, which at length induced his father to consent to 
his death, B.C. 181. It may have been remorse for his hasty act 
which brought Philip himself to the grave within two years of 
his son's decease, at the age of fifty-eight. 

33. It is said that Philip had intended, on discovering the inno- 
cence of Demetrius, and the guilt of his false accuser, Perseus, to 
debar the latter from the succession. He brought for- 

-A-CCCSSIOTI of 

ward into public life a certain Antigonus, a nephew xh& last king, 

of Antigonus Doson, and would, it is believed, Perseus, 
, ° ' ' ' B. c. 179. 

have made him his heir, had he not died both pre- 
maturely and suddenly. Antigonus being absent from the Court, 
Perseus mounted the throne without opposition ; but he took care 

T 1 



276 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

to secure himself in its possession by soon afterwards murdering 
his rival. 

34. It had been the aim of Philip, ever since the battle of 

Cynocephalae, and it continued to be the aim of Perseus, to 

maintain the peace with Rome as long as might be 

foSrS feasible, but at the same time to invigorate and 

struggle strensthen Macedonia in every possible way, and so 
with Rome. ^ , _ j i , x.- I -^ 

to prepare her for a second struggle, which it was 

hoped might terminate differently from the first. Philip re-popu- 
lated his exhausted provinces by transplantations of Thracians and 
others, recruited his finances by careful working of the mineral 
treasures in which Macedonia abounded, raised and disciplined 
a large military force, and entered into alliances with several of 
the northern nations, Illyrian, Celtic, and perhaps even German, 
whom he hoped to launch against Rome, when the proper time 
should arrive. Perseus, inheriting this policy, pursued it diligently 
for eight years, allying himself by intermarriages with Prusias of 
Bithynia and Seleucus of Syria, winning to his cause Cotys the 
Odrysian, Gentius the Illyrian, the Scordisci, the Bastarnae, and 
others. Even in Greece he had a considerable party, who thought 
his yoke would be more tolerable than that of Rome. Boeotia 
actually entered into his alliance- and the other states mostly 
wavered and might have been won, had proper measures been 
taken. But as the danger of a rupture drew near, Perseus' good 
genius seemed to forsake him. He continued to pursue the policy 
of procrastination long after the time had arrived for vigorous and 
prompt action. He allowed Rome to crush his friends in Greece 
without reaching out a hand to their assistance. Above all, by 
a foolish and ill-timed niggardliness, he lost the advantage of 
almost all the alliances which he had contracted, disgusting and 
alienating his allies, one after another, by the refusal of the 
subsidies which they required before setting their troops in motion. 
He thus derived no benefit from his well-filled treasury, which 
simply went to swell the Roman gains at the end of the war. 
35. The Romans landed in Epirus in the spring of b. c, 171, 
War of 3,nd employed themselves for some months in de- 
Perseus with taching from Perseus his allies, and in putting down 
B.C. ' his party in the Greek states. They dissolved 
171-169. ^]^g Boeotian League, secured the election of their 
partisans in various places, and obtained promises of aid from 



PEE. III. PART in.] MACEDON AND GREECE. 277 

Achjea and Thessaly. Perseus allowed himself to be entrapped 
into making a truce during these months, and the Romans were 
thus able to complete their preparations at their leisure. At 
length, towards autumn, both armies took the field — Perseus with 
39,000 foot and 4,000 horse, the Romans with an equal number 
of horse, but with foot not much exceeding 30,000. In the first 
battle, which was fought in Thessaly, Perseus was victorious ; but 
he made no use of his victory, except to sue for peace, which was de- 
nied him. The war then languished for two years j but in B.C. 168, 
the command being taken by L. ^Emilius Paullus, Battle of 
Perseus was forced to an engagement near Pydna Pydna. 
(June 22), which decided the fate of the monarchy. The defeated 
prince fled to Samothrace^ carrying with him 6,000 talents — a sum 
the judicious expenditure of which might have turned the scale 
against the Romans. Here he was shortly afterwards captured by 
the prsetor, Octavius, and, being carried to Rome by the victorious 
consul, was led in triumph, and within a few years killed by ill 
usage, about b. c. 1 66. 

According to some accounts, Perseus voluntarily starved himself to death ; 
but the more general statement is that he was killed by his guards, who had 
orders to prevent him from sleeping. The exact date of his death is un- 
certain, 

36. The conquered kingdom of Macedonia was not at once re- 
duced into the form of a Roman province, but was divided up into 
four distinct states, each of them, it would seem, a Treatment of 
kind of federal republic, which were expressly for- Macedonia. 
bidden to have any dealings one with another. Amphipolis, Thessa- 
lonica, Pella, and Pelagonia were made the capitals of the four 
states. To prevent any outburst of discontent at the loss of poUtical 
status, the burthens hitherto laid upon the people were lightened. 
Rome was content to receive in tribute from the Macedonians 
one-half the amount which they had been in the habit of paying 
to their kings. 

37. In Greece, the immediate efFect of the last Macedonian 
War was the disappearance of four out of the five Federal Unions, 
which had recently divided almost the whole of the y&^(± of the 
Hellenic soil among them. The allegiance of war on 
iEtolia had wavered during the struggle ; and at its 

close the Romans either formally dissolved the League, or made it 
simply municipal. Acarnania, which went over to Rome in the 



278 MACEDONIAN KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

course of the war, was nominally allowed to continue a con- 
federacy, but practically vanishes from Grecian history from this 
moment. Boeotia having submitted, b. c. 171, was formally broken 
up into distinct cities. Epirus was punished for deserting the 
Roman side by desolation and depopulation, the remnant of her 
people being handed over to the rule of a tyrant. The only 
power remaining in Greece which possessed at once some strength, 
and a remnant of independence, was Achsea, whose fidelity to 
Rome during the whole course of the war made it impossible even 
for the Roman Senate to proceed at once to treat her as an enemy. 

38. Achsea, nevertheless, was doomed from the moment that 
Macedonia fell. The policy of Rome was at this time not 

Proceedings of guided by a sense of honour, but wholly by a regard 
the Romans fQj- ]^gj. q^jj interests. Having crushed Macedonia 

in Achcea. ° 

Deportation and mastered all Greece except Achsea, she required 
thousand ^'^'" ^^^ Completion of her work in this quarter that 
chief citizens. Achaea should either become wholly submissive to her 
will, or be conquered. It was at once to test the submissiveness 
of the Achsean people^ and to obtain hostages for their continued 
good behaviour, that Rome, in b.c. 167, required by her ambassa- 
dors the trial of above a thousand of the chief Achseans on the 
charge of having secretly aided Perseus j and, when the Achaean 
Assembly did not dare to refuse, carried off to Italy the whole of 
the accused persons. All the more moderate and independent 
of the Achaeans were thus deported, and the strong partisans of 
Rome, Callicrates and his friends, were left in sole possession 
of the government. For seventeen years the accused persons 
were kept in prison in Etruscan towns without a hearing. Then, 

when their number had dwindled to three hundred. 
Their return. i i • ■ i • i i i , 

and their unjust detention had so exasperated them 

that a rash and reckless policy might be expected from their return 

to power, Rome suddenly released the remnant and sent them 

back to their country, 

39. The natural consequences followed. Power fell into the 
hands of Diaeus, Critolaiis, and Damocritus, three of the exiles 

Last War of "^^^ Were most bitterly enraged against Rome j and 
the Achseans these persons played into the hands of their hated 

against . . . i i • 

Rome, ends enemies by exciting troubles intended to annoy the 

B. c. 146. Romans, but which really gave them the pretext — 

which was exactly what they wanted — for an armed interference. 



PER. III. PART IV.] LESSER KINGDOMS. 279 

The rebellion of Andriscus, a pretended son of Perseus, in Mace- 
donia (B.C. 149 to 148), caused a brief delay; but in b. c. 146, four 
years after the return of the exiles, war was actually declared. 
Metellus first, and then Mummius, defeated the forces of the 
League ; Critolaiis fell in battle ; Diceus slew himself; Corinth, 
where the remnant of the Achsean army had taken refuge, was 
taken and sacked, and the last faint spark of Grecian independence 
was extinguished. Achsea was not, indeed, at once reduced into 
a province ; and, though the League was formally dissolved, yet, 
after an interval, its nominal revival was permitted ; but the sub- 
stance of liberty had vanished at the battle of Leucopetra, and the 
image of it which Polybius was allowed to restore was a mere 
shadow, known by both parties to be illusory. Before many years 
were past, Achaea received, like the other provinces, her proconsul, 
and became an integral part of the great empire against which she 
had found it vain to attempt to struggle. 

Details of the Last Achsean War. Interference of the League between 
Athens and Oropus, and also between Sparta and Megalopolis, B.C. 150. 
Appeal of Sparta to Rome, answered by an ambiguous rescript, B.C. 149. 
Defeat of the Spartans by Damocritus, B.C. 148. Interference of Metellus. 
Dissolution of the League demanded. In return, the Roman envoys are 
insulted at Corinth. After fruitless negotiations, which consume most of the 
year B.C. 147, war is finally declared in B.C. 146, Critolaiis being Achsean 
general, and Metellus the commander on the Roman side. Heracleia having 
revolted from the League, Critolaiis proceeds to reduce it, but is forced to 
raise the siege by Metellus, who completely defeats him at Scarpheia, near 
Thermopylae. Death of Critolaiis. Final effort made by Diseus. He collects 
a force at Corinth ; gains a slight advantage over the Romans under Mummius, 
and then fights the pitched battle of Leucopetra, in which he is completely 
beaten. Corinth falls. Mummius plunders and destroys it. 



PART IV. 

History of the Smaller States a7id Kingdoms formed out of the 
Fragments of Alexander's Monarchy. 

Sources. Besides most of the ancient writers mentioned above as autho- 
rities for the history of the Syrian, Egyptian, and Macedonian kingdoms, the 
following are of value '-—{a) The fragments of Memnon of Heracleia Pontica, 
published in the Fragmenta Historicorum Grcecoriim of C. MiiLLER. Paris, 
1849; vol. iii. {b) The Parthka of Arrian, contained in the Bibliotloeca of 
Photius (ed. Bekker. Berolini, 1824; 2 vols. 4to.). (c) The great work 
of the Jewish historian Fl. Josephus, entitled Antiquitatum Judaicarum libri xx. 
(ed. K. E. RiCHTER. Lipsise, 1825-7; 4 vols. 8vo.). {d) Ammianus Mar- 
CELLINUS, Historia Romana (ed. Wagner et Erfurdt. Lipsise, 1808 ; 3 vols. 
8vo.). And, especially for the Jewish history, (i) The Books of Maccabees. 



28o LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

Modern works on this portion of Ancient History treat, in general, only- 
some branch of it, and will therefore find their most fitting place under the 
heads of the various states and kingdoms. 

Besides the three main kingdoms of Syria^ Egypt, and Mace- 
donia, which were formed out of the great empire of Alexander, 
„. r there arose in the East at this time^ partly out of 
smaller States Alexander's dominions, partly out of unconquered 
fragments of portions of the Persian territory, a number of inde- 
Aiexander's pendent lesser states, mostly monarchies, which 
played an important part in Oriental history during 
the decline of the Macedonian and the rise of the Roman power, 
and of which therefore some account must be given in a work like 
the present. The principal of these were, first, in Asia Minor, Per- 
gamus, Bithynia, Paphlagonia, Pontus, and Cappadocia^ secondly, 
in the region adjoining, Greater and Lesser Armenia; thirdly, 
in the remoter East, Bactria and Parthia; and fourthly, in the 
tract between Syria and Egypt, Judaea. 

Our information on the subject of these kingdoms is very scanty. No 
ancient writer gives us any continuous or separate history of any of them. 
It is only so far as they become implicated in the affairs of the greater 
kingdoms that they attract the ancient writers' attention. Their history is 
thus very incomplete, and sometimes quite fragmentai-y. Much, however, has 
been done towards making out a continuous narrative, in some cases, by 
a skilful combination of scattered notices, and a judicious use of the knowledge 
derived from coins. 



I. KINGDOM OF PERGAMUS. 

I. In Western Asia the most important of the lesser kingdoms 

was that of Pergamus, which arose in the course of the war waged 

Kingdom of between Seleucus Nicator and Lysimachus. (See 

Pergamus : above, p. 22o). Small and insignificant at its origin, 

its rise and i • i • i 07 

general this kmgdom gradually grew into power and im- 
featmes. portance by the combined military genius and pru- 
dence of its princes, who had the skill to side always with the 
stronger party. By assisting Syria against the revolted satrap, 
Achaeus, and Rome against Macedcn and Syria, the kings of 
Pergamus gradually enlarged their dominion, until they were 
at length masters of fully half Asia Minor. At the same time, 
they had the good taste to encourage art and literature, and 
to render the capital of their kingdom a sort of rival to Alexandria. 
They adorned Pergamus with noble buildings, the remains of 



PER. III. PART IV.] PERGAMUS. 281 

which may be seen at the present day. They warmly fostered the 
kindred arts of painting and sculpture. To advance literature, 
they established an extensive public library, and attracted to their 
capital a considerable number of learned men. A grammatical 
and critical school grew up at Pergamus only second to the Alex- 
andrian j and the Egyptian papyrus was outdone, as a literary 
material, by the chart a Fergamena (parchment). 

3. The founder of the kingdom was a certain Philetaerus, a 
eunuch, whom Lysimachus had made governor of the place and 
guardian of his treasures. On the death of Lysi- 
machus at the battle of Corupedion, Philetaerus philetems, 
maintained possession of the fortress on his own oq^'ooo 

281— 2o3. 

account, and, by a judicious employment of the 
wealth, whereof he had become possessed, in the hire of mercenaries 
and otherwise, he succeeded in establishing his independence, and 
even in transmitting his principality and treasure to his nephew, 
Eumenes, the son of Eumenes, his brother. 

3. Eumenes I, the successor of Philetserus, was attacked, very 
shortly after his accession, by Antiochus I, the son and successor 
of Seleucus, but defeated him in a pitched battle near 

Sardis, and obtained an increase of territory by his Eumenes I, 
victory. He reigned twenty-two years, and died 5,^0' 041 
from the effects of over-drinking, b.c. 341, bequeath- 
ing Pergamus to his first cousin. Attains — the son of his father's 
brother, Attalus, by Antiochis, the daughter of Achseus. 

4. Attalus I distinguished himself early in his reign (about 
B.C. 239) by a great victory over the Gauls, who had been now for 
above thirty years settled in Northern Phrygia 

(Galatia), whence they made continual plundering Attalus I, 
raids upon their neighbours. On obtainina; this ^•*^- 

r o o 241-197. 

success, he for the first time assumed the title of 
' king,' having previously^ like his two predecessors, borne only that 
of ' dynast.' From this time we hear nothing of him for the space 
of about ten years, when we find him engaged in a war with 
Antiochus Hierax, the brother of Seleucus Callinicus, who was 
endeavouring to make himself king of Asia Minor. Having 
defeated this ambitious prince, and driven him out of Asia, Attalus 
succeeded in vastly enlarging his own dominions, which, about 
B.C. 336, included most of the countries west of the Halys and 
north of Taurus. But the Syrian monarchs were not inclined 



282 LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

to submit to this loss of territory. First Seleucus Ceraunus 
(B.C. 2^6), and then Antiochus the Great, by his general Achaeus 
(B.C. 323), made war upon Attalus, and by the year b.c. 231 
his conquests were all lost, and his dominions once more 
reduced to the mere Pergamene principality. But in b.c. 318 the 
tide again turned. By the help of Gallic mercenaries Attalus 
recovered tEoUs; and two years later he made a treaty with 
Antiochus the Great against Achasus, who had been driven into 
revolt, which led to his receiving back from Antiochus, after 
Achaeus' defeat and death, b.c. 214, most of the territory whereof 
he had been deprived seven years previously. Three years after 
this, b. c. 211, by joining the ^Etolians and Romans against Philip, 
he laid the foundation of the later prosperity of his kingdom, 
which depended on its enjoying the favour and patronage of Rome. 
In vain Philip, after peace had been made, b. c. 204, turned upon 
Attalus, invading and ravaging his territory, and endeavouring to 
sweep his fleet from the sea. Attalus,' in alliance with Rhodes, 
proved more than a match for this antagonist ; and the battle of 
Chios, B.C. 201, avenged the desolation of Pergamus. In the 
second war between Rome and Philip, b.c. 199, the Pergamene 
monarch, though he was seventy years of age, took again an active 
part, supporting the Romans with his fleet and giving them very 
valuable aid. But the exertion proved too much for his physical 
strength : he was seized with illness as he pleaded the cause of 
Rome in an assembly of the Boeotians, b.c. 197, and, having been 
conveyed to Pergamus, died there in the course of the same year. 
He left behind him four sons by his wife Apollonias, viz. Eumenes, 
Attalus, Philetaerus, and Athenaeus. 

The encouragement of art and literature by the Pergamene monarchs dates 
from this reign. Already were the temples raised, so noted for their magnifi- 
cence and rare workmanship. The cordial reception of Attalus at Athens was no 
doubt in part owing to the character of a patron of learning which attached to him, 

5. Eumenes II, the eldest of the sons of Attalus, succeeded him. He 

was a prudent and warlike prince, the inheritor at once of his father's 

talents and his policy. In the wars which Rome 

Eumen'es^ll, waged with Philip, with Antiochus, and with Perseus, 

B- ^- he threw his weight on the Roman side, only on one 

197-159. . , . ,. , ' ^ "^ 

occasion showing some slight symptoms of wavering, 
when in b.c. 169 he held some separate correspondence with Perseus. 
In return for the aid which he furnished against Antiochus, Rome, 



PER. III. PART IV.] PERGAMUS. 283 

after the battle of Magnesia, made over to him the greater part of 
the territory whereof she had deprived the Syrian king. Not only 
were Mysia, Lydia, Phrygia, Lycaonia, Pamphylia, and portions of 
Caria and Lycia, acknowledged now by the authority of Rome to 
be integral parts of the kingdom of Pergamus, but even the Cher- 
sonese, with its capital Lysimacheia, and the adjacent parts of 
Thrace, were attached to it. The Pergamene monarchy became in 
this way one of the greatest kingdoms of the East ^ and in the war 
which followed with Prusias of Bithynia, b.c. i83_, it was still 
further enlarged by the addition of the Hellespontine Phrygia. In 
those waged with Pharnaces of Pontus, b.c. 183 to 179, and with 
the GaulSj about b.c. 168, it was, however, the object of Eumenes 
to maintain, rather than to enlarge, his boundaries. Towards the 
close of his long reign he seems to have become suspicious of 
the increasing power of the Romans, and to have been inclined 
to counteract their influence, so far as he dared. Hence the 
Romans distrusted him, and were disposed to support against him 
his brother Attalus, who was more thoroughly attached to their 
interests. It was perhaps fortunate for Eumenes that he died 
when he did : otherwise, he might have had to contend for the 
possession of his kingdom with his own brother, supported by ail 
the power of Rome. 

The patronage of art and literature, commenced by the first Attalus, was 
carried yet further by Eumenes. He founded the great library at Pergamus, 
which was regarded as rivalling that of Alexandria, and adorned his capital with 
a vast number of splendid buildings. Crates of Mallus began to teach at Per- 
gamus in his reign. 

6. Though Eumenes left behind him a son, called Attalus, yet, 

as this Attalus was a mere boy, the crown was assumed by his 

uncle, Attalus, who took the surname of Philadelphus. Reign of 

Philadelphus reigned twenty-one years, from b.c. 1(^0 Attalus 11, 

„^ T , ,• r , • • , (Philadelphus), 

to 138. In the earlier part of his reign he was b.c. 

actively engaged in various wars, restoring Ariarathes 159-138. 

to his kingdom, about b.c. 157, helping Alexander Bala against 

Demetrius, b.c. 152^, assisting the Romans to crush Andriscus, the 

pseudo-Philip, b.c. 149 to 148, and, above all, engaging in a prolonged 

contest with Prusias II, who would undoubtedly have conquered 

him and annexed Pergamus to Bithynia, if Attalus had not called 

in the aid of Ariarathes of Cappadocia and Mithridates of Pontus, 

and also that of the Romans. The threats of Rome forced Prusias 

to abstain, and even to compensate Attalus for his losses. Attalus, 



284 LESSOR KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

nevertheless, was glad when, b.c. 149, an opportunity offered itself 

of exchanging Prusias for a more peaceful and friendly neighbour. 

With this view he supported Nicomedes in his rebellion against 

his father, and helped to establish him in his kingdom. A quiet 

time followed, which Attains devoted to the strengthening of his 

power by the building of new cities, and to the encouragement of 

literature and art. Becoming infirm as he approached his eightieth 

year, he devolved the cares of the government on his minister, 

Philopoemen, who became the real ruler of the country. Finally, at 

the age of eighty-two, Philadelphus died, leaving the crown to his 

nephew and ward. Attains, the son of Eumenes II, who must have 

been now about thirty years old. 

Among the cities built by Philadelphus were Eumeneia in Phrygia, Philadel- 
pheia in Lydia, and Attaleia in Pamphylia. He is said to have given 100 talents 
(nearly 25,000/.) for a picture, and to have offered for another 600,000 sesterces 
(4j375^-)' He greatly augmented the hbrary commenced by his predecessor. 
Crates of Mallus belongs mainly to his reign. 

7. Attains III, the son of Eumenes II, on ascending the throne 
took the name of Philometor, in honour of his mother, Stratonice, 

Reign of ^^^ daughter of Ariarathes, king of Cappadocia. He 

Attaluslll reigned five years only, from b.c. 138 to 133; yet 

B. c. ' into this short space he crowded more crimes and 

138-133. odious actions than are ascribed to all the other 
kings of his house put together. He condemned to death without 
trial all the old counsellors and friends of his father and uncle, and 
at the same time destroyed their families. He then caused to be 
assassinated almost all those who held any office of trust in the 
kingdom. Finally, he turned against his own relations, and even 
put to death his mother, for whom he had professed a warm affec- 
tion. At length remorse seized him, and he abandoned the cares 
of State, devoting himself to painting, sculpture, and gardening, on 
which last subject he wrote a work. He died of a fever, brought 
on, it is said, by a sun-stroke ; and, by a will as strange as his 
conduct, left the Roman People his heir. 

8. Rome readily accepted the legacy ; but Aristonicus, a bastard 
son of Eumenes II, boldly disputed the prize with them, claiming 

the kingdom as his natural inheritance. He compelled 

Aristonicus, the cities to acknowledge him, which had at first 

133-130 refused through fear of the Romans; and when 

Licinius Crassus was sent to take forcible possession 

of the country, Aristonicus defeated him, and took him prisoner. 



PER. III. PAET IV.] BITHYNIA. 285 

B.C. 131. In the year following, however, Aristonicus was himself 
defeated and made prisoner by Peperna ; and the kingdom of Per- 
gamus became shortly afterwards a Roman province 

On the history of Pergamus, see the Essay of the Abbe Sevin, Recherches siir 
les Rots de Pergame, in the Memoires de V Academie des Inscriptions^ vol. xii. Paris, 
1729; 4to. And CLlHTO'ii's Kings of Pergamus, in h\s Fasti Helknici, \o\. \\\. 
Appendix, chap. vi. 

On the remains of the ancient town, see Choiseul-Gouffier, Foyage 
Pittoresque de la Grece. Paris, 1782-1809 ; 2 vols, folio; and Arundell, 
Visit to the Seven Churches in Asia. London, 1828 ; 8vo. 



II. KINGDOM OP BITHYNIA. 



1. Though Bithynia was conquered by Croesus {supra j p. 37), 
and submitted readily to Cyrus, when he absorbed the Lydian 
empire into his own dominions, yet we find, somewhat early in the 
Persian period, that the country is governed by native . 
kings, who are not unfrequently at war with the independent 
satraps of Asia Minor. The first of these semi- th'J'ferskns 
independent monarchs is Dydalsus, who must have b. c. 

430—333 

been contemporary with the earlier part of the Pelo- 
ponnesian War. He was succeeded by Boteiras, probably the oppo- 
nent of Pharnabazus (about b.c. 400), who left the crown to his 
son, Bas, b.c. 376. This king, the last under the Persians,, held 
the throne for the long term of fifty years, and thus saw the com- 
mencement of the new state of things under the Macedonians. 

2. With the dissolution of the Persian empire, which Alexander's 
conquests brought about, Bithynia acquired complete independence. 
Bas successfully resisted the attempts^ which Alex- ^ . ^„ 
ander made by his general Carantus (Caranus?) to b.c. 
reduce him, and at his death, in b.c. 326, he left to 

his son, Zipoetes, a flourishing and wholly autonomous kingdom. 

3. Zipoetes, the son and successor of Bas, successfully main- 
tained the independence, which he had inherited, against the 
attacks of Lysimachus and Antiochus Soter, while he 
threatened the Greek cities in his neighbourhood, zipStes, 
Heracleia Pontica, Astacus, and Chalcedon. He ^•''• 

' ' 326-278. 

reigned forty-eight years, from b.c. 326 to b.c. 278, 

and left behind him four sons, Nicomedes, Zipoetes, and two 

others. 



2 86 LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

Following the example of the contemporary Macedonian monarchs, Zipoetes 
built himself a new capital, which he called after his own name — Zipoetium 
under Mount Lyperus. 

4. It would seem that, at the death of Zipoetes, a dispute con- 
cerning the succession arose between two of his sons. The eldest 

Reign of ^^ them, Nicomedes, finding himself in danger of 

Nicomedes I, losing the kingdom to Zipoetes, his younger brother, 

278 to about invited the Gauls to cross over from Europe to his 

2*^- assistance, and by their aid defeated his brother and 

fully established his authority. He repelled by the same aid an attack 

on his independence made by Antiochus I. Nothing more is 

known of Nicomedes, except that he founded Nicomedeia on the 

Gulf of AstacuSj and that he married two wives, Ditizele and Eta- 

zeta, by the former of whom he had a single son, Ze'ilas, while by 

the latter he had three children, Prusias, Tiboetes, and Lysandra, to 

whom, for their mother's sake, he desired to leave his kingdom. 

5. Zeilas, who was living as an exile in Armenia, having 
obtained the services of a band of Gauls, entered Bithynia, and 

• established his authority by a war in which he 
Zeilasfabout frequently defeated the partisans of his half-brothers. 
B. c. Very little is known of his history ; but we may 

gather from some passages that he carried on suc- 
cessful wars with Paphlagonia and Cappadocia, in both of which 
countries he founded cities. He reigned about twenty years, and 
finally perished in an attempt which he made to destroy by 
treachery a number of Gallic chiefs at a banquet. He was 
succeeded by his son, Prusias. 

6. Prusias I, known as ' Prusias the Lame,' ascended the throne 
probably about b.c, 228, and held it at least forty-five years. The 

Reign of earlier years of his reign were uneventful ; but, from 
Prusias I, about B.C. 330 nearly to his death, he was engaffed 

about . . _ . -^ , , , . 

B.C. in a series of important wars, and brought into 

228-180. contact with some of the chief powers of Asia and 
Europe. By his unceasing energy he extended his dominions in 
several directions, and would have raised Bithynia into one of the 
most important of the Asiatic kingdoms, had he not unfortunately 
given offence to the Romans, first, by attacking their ally, 
Eumenes of Pergamus, and, secondly, by sheltering Hannibal. 
Not content with extorting the consent of Prusias to the surrender 
of the Carthaginian refugee, who was thereby driven to put an 



PEE. III. PAET IV.] BITHYNIA. 287 

end to his own life, Rome, under the threat of war, compelled the 
Bithynian monarch to cede to Eumenes the whole of the Helles- 
pontine Phrygia. He compensated himself to some extent by 
attacking Heracleia Pontica ; but here he received the wound from 
which he derived his surname of 'the Lame,' and shortly after 
this he died^ leaving the crown to a son called, like himself, 
Prusias. 

Details of this Reign. Prusias assists Rhodes against Byzantium, B.C. 220. 
Tiboetes, his uncle, is moved to assert his claims to the Bithynian crown ; but, 
while on his way to do so, dies, B. c. 219. Prusias sends rich presents to the 
Rhodians after the destruction of their city by an earthquake, B.C. 217. 
Gains a great victory over the Gauls, B.C. 216. Joins Philip of Macedon 
in his first war against Rome, and attacks the territories of Attains, who 
is thereby forced to return to Asia, B. c. 208. Between the first and second 
Macedonian "War joins Philip in the siege of Cius, which he takes and keeps, 
changing its name to Prusa. At the same time, B.C. 203, betakes Myrleia 
and calls it Apameia, after his wife. From the second Macedonian War, and 
from the war between Rome and Antiochus the Great, he stands aloof ; but 
after the Romans have withdrawn, B.C. 188, he ventures to attack, and, by 
Hannibal's help, defeats Eumenes. Rome hereupon interposes, demands 
Hannibal, B.C. 183, and makes Prusias compensate Eumenes by the cession 
of a province. Prusias then goes to war with Heracleia Pontica, and takes 
Cierus and Tins, but is wounded and soon afterwards dies, about B.C. 180. 

7. Prusias II, the son and successor of Prusias I, was the most 
wicked and contemptible of the Bithynian monarchs. Though 
he had married, at his own request, the sister of the 
Macedonian king, Perseus, yet, when that monarch pms^ II, 
was attacked by the Romans, he lent him no aid, ^■*^- 

•^ ' ' 180-149. 

only venturing once, b.c. 169, to intercede for his 
brother-in-law by an embassy. When victory declared itself on 
the Roman side, he made the most abject submission, and thus 
obtained the assent of Rome to his retention of his kingdom. 
Like his father, he lived on bad terms with Eumenes • and, when 
that king died and was succeeded by Attalus II, he ventured to 
begin a war, b.c. 156, which would certainly have been successful, 
had the Romans abstained from interference. They, however, 
by threats induced Prusias to consent to a peace, by which he 
relinquished the fruits of his victories, and even engaged to pay 
to Attalus the sum of 500 talents. Meanwhile, he had alienated 
the affections of his subjects by his cruelties and impieties, while 
Nicomedes, his son, had conciliated their regard. Viewing 
therefore his son as a rival, Prusias first sent him to Rome, and 
then gave orders that he should be assassinated. But his emissary 
betrayed him; and Nicomedes, learning his danger, with the 



288 LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

connivance of the Senate, quitted Rome and returned as a pre- 
tender to his own country. There, being openly supported by 
Attalus, and known to have the good wishes of the Romans, he 
was received with general favour ; and, having besieged his father 
in Nicomedeia, obtained possession of his person and put him 
to death, b.c. 149. 

8. Nicomedes II, who now mounted the throne, followed the 
example of the Syrian and Egyptian kings in assuming the title 

of *^ Epiphanes,' or 'Illustrious.' He reigned fifty- 

NiconSdes 11, eight years, from b.c. 149 to 91, and took an active 

B-c. part in the wars which at this time desolated Asia 

149 -91 

Minor. It was his object to stand well with the 
Romans, and hence he willingly sent a contingent to their aid 
when they warred with Aristonicus of Pergamus (see p. 384), 
B.C. 133 to 130, and, professedly at any rate, rendered obedience 
to the various commands which they addressed to him. Still he 
made several attempts, all of them more or less displeasing to 
Rome, at increasing the power and extent of his kingdom. 
In B.C. 102, he attacked Paphlagonia in combination with Mith- 
ridates the Great, and took possession of a portion of it. Required 
by Rome to restore his conquest to the legitimate heir, he handed 
it over to one of his own sons, whom he pretended to be a Paphla- 
gonian prince, and made him take the name of Pylaemenes. 
Shortly afterwards, b.c. 96, when Mithridates endeavoured to 
annex Cappadocia, and Laodice, the widow of the late king, fled 
to him, he married her, and,' warmly espousing her cause^ 
established her as queen in Cappadocia ; whence, however, she was 
shortly expelled by Mithridates. Finally, in b.c. 93, after the 
deaths of the two sons of Laodice, he brought forward an impostor, 
who claimed to be also her son, and endeavoured to obtain for him 
the crown of Cappadocia. Here, however, he overreached himself. 
The imposture was detected ; and Rome not only refused to admit 
the title of his protege to the Cappadocian crown, but required him 
likewise to abandon possession of Paphlagonia, which was to be 
restored to independence. Soon after this, the long reign of 
Nicomedes II came to an end. His age at his decease cannot 
have been much less than eighty. 

9. Nicomedes II left behind him two sons, Nicomedes and 
Socrates, who was surnamed 'the Good' (Xprjcrro's). Nicomedes, 
who was the elder of the two, succeeded, and is known as 



PEE. III. PART IV.] PAPHLAGONIA. 289 

Nicomedes III. He took the titles of 'Epiphanes' and 'Philo- 
f ator/ Scarcely was he seated on the throne when, 
at the instigation of Mithridates, his brother Socrates, Nicomedes III, 
accusing him of illegitimacy, claimed the kingdom, ^'^'a 
and, with the aid of an army which Mithridates 
furnished^ drove Nicomedes out, and assumed the crown. Rome, 
however, in the next year, b.c. 90, by a simple decree reinstated 
Nicomedes, who proceeded, in b.c. 89, to retaliate upon Mith- 
ridates by plundering incursions into his territories. Thus pro- 
voked, Mithridates, in b.c. 88, collected a vast army, defeated 
Nicomedes on the Amneius, and drove him with his Roman allies 
out of Asia. The first Mithridatic War followed ; and at its close, 
in B. c. 84, Nicomedes was restored to his kingdom for the second 
time, and had a tranquil reign after this for the space of ten years. 
Dying without issue, in b.c. 74, he left by will his kingdom to the 
Romans — a legacy which brought about the third and greatest 
' Mithridatic War.' 

The history of the kings of Bithynia has been treated of separately by 
several writers. Among them may be noticed : — 

SeviN, Recherches sur les Rots de Bithynie, in the Memoires de V Academie des 
Inscriptions, vol. xv. 

Foy-Vaillant, J., Regum BithynicB Historta, in his Achamenidarum Im- 
perium. Paris, 1725 ; 4to. 

Clinton, H. F., Kings of Bithynia, in his Fasti Hellenici, vol. iii. Appendix, 
chap. vii. 

III. KINGDOM OP PAPHLAGONIA. 

T. Like Bithynia, Paphlagonia became semi-independent under 
the Achasmenian monarchs. As early as b.c. 400, the rulers of 
the country are said to have paid very little regard „. , . 

■' r / o Kings during 

to the Great King's orders j and in b.c. 394 we find the Persian 
the monarch, Cotys, allying himself with Agesilaiis P^"° ' 
against Persia. Thirty or forty years later another king is 
mentioned as reduced by the Persian satrap, Datames. On the 
dissolution of the Persian empire, Paphlagonia was attached to his 
dominions by Mithridates of Pontus, and it continued for a con- 
siderable time to be a portion of the Pontic kingdom. 

Early Paphlagonian Kings: — 1. Corylas, about B.C. 400, allows the 
Ten Thousand to pass through his country. 2. Cotys, or Otys, makes 
alliance with Agesilaiis, and assists him in his war with Pharnabazus, B.C. 394. 
3. Thyus, or Thys, noted for the magnificence of his entertainments, is at- 
tacked by Datames, at the command of Artaxerxes Mnemon, made prisoner, 
and carried to the court, where he continues to live in extraordinary splendour, 
about B.C. 375 to 365. 

U 



2 90 LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

3. The circumstances under which, and the time when, Paph- 

lagonia regained its independence, are unknown to us ; but, soon 

after B.C. :?oo, we find the throne once more occupied by native 

monarchs, who are entangled in the wars of the period. These 

princes have a difficulty in maintaining themselves against 

the monarchs of Pontus on the one hand, and those of Bithynia 

on the other; but they nevertheless hold the throne till b.c. 103, 

when^ the last native king, Pylaemenes I, dying without issue, 

Mithridates the Great and Nicomedes II conjointly seize the 

country, and the latter establishes on the throne one of his own 

sons^ who rules for about eight years, when Mithridates expels him 

and takes possession of the whole territory. 

Later Paphlagonian Blings: — 1. Morzes or Morzias, fights against the 
Romans in the Gallo-Graecian War, B.C. 189. Is attacked and conquered 
by Pharnaces, about B.C. 181, but reinstated in his dominions and compensated 
in B.C. 179. 2. Pylaemenes I assists the Romans in their war against 
Aristonicus of Pergamus, B.C. 131. Said to have bequeathed his kingdom 
to Mithridates. 3. Pylaemenes II, the son of Nicomedes II, of Bithynia. 
Placed on the throne by his father, B.C. 102. Forced to retire, about B.C. 90. 



IV. KINGDOM OP PONTUS. 

I. The satrapy of Cappadocia appears to have been conferred 
by Darius Hystaspis as an hereditary fief on Otanes, one of the 
Foundation seven conspirators, who was descended from the 
of the ancient Arian kings of Cappadocia. It continued 
Ariobarzanes I, to form a single province of the empire, and to be 
B.C. 363. governed by satraps descended from Otanes, till the 
year b.c. 2,^'^, when Ariobarzanes, the son of the Mithridates who 
was satrap in the time of Xenophon, rebelled, and made himself 
king of the portion of Cappadocia which lay along the coast, and 
which was thence called ' Pontus' by the Greeks. Inland Cappa- 
docia continued to be a province of Persia. Ariobarzanes reigned 
twenty-six years, from b.c. 363 to 337, when he was succeeded 
by his son, Mithridates I (commonly called Mithridates II), who 
held the kingdom at the time of the Macedonian invasion. 

3. Mithridates I, who ascended the throne b.c. 337, seems to 
have remained neutral during the contest between 
Mithi'^ates I, D^rius Codomannus and Alexander. On the re- 
^■^- duction of Cappadocia by Perdiccas, b.c. 333, he 

was, however, compelled to submit to the Macedo- 
nians, after which he enjoyed for a time the favour of Antigonus 



PEE. III. PAKT IV.] PONTUS. 



291 



and helped him in his wars. But Antigonus, growing jealous 
of him, basely plotted his death j whereupon he returned to Pontus 
and resumed a separate sovereignty, about b.c. 318. In b.c. 317 
he supported Eumenes against Antigonus j and in b.c. 302 he was 
about to join the league of the satraps against the same monarch, 
when Antigonus, suspecting his intention, caused him to be 
assassinated. 

3. Mithridates II, the son of Mithridates I, succeeded. He 
added considerably to his hereditary dominions by the acquisition 
of parts of Cappadocia and Paphlagonia, and even 

ventured to conclude an alliance with the Greeks Mithridates II 
of Heracleia Pontica, b.c. 381, whom he undertook ^•^• 

' ' 302-266. 

to defend against Seleucus. According to Diodorus_, 

he reigned thirty-six years, from b.c. 30a to 266. He left the 

crown to his son, Ariobarzanes. 

4. Ariobarzanes II, who appears to have reigned about twenty- 
one years, from b.c. 266 to 245, did little to distinguish himself. 
He repulsed an attack of Ptolemy (Euergetes ?) by -R.^xga of 
the assistance of the Gauls, but afterwards quarrelled Ariobarzanes II," 

' ^ B.C. 266 

with that fickle people, whose close neighbourhood to about 
was very injurious to his kingdom. He also ob- ^^^" 
tained possession of the town of Amastris upon the Euxine, 
which was surrendered to him by Eumenes, its dynast. On 
his death he was succeeded by his son, Mithridates, who was 
a minor. 

5. Mithridates III^ the most distinguished of the earlier Pontic 
monarchs, made it his object to strengthen and augment his 
kingdom by alliances with the other monarchs and 

princes of Asia, rather than by warfare. As soon as Mithridates III, 
he had attained to manhood, he married a sister !;^°^l^f- 

^ 245-190. 

of Seleucus Callinicus, with whom he received the 
province of Phrygia as a dowry. In b.c. 222, he gave his daughter, 
Laodice, in marriage to Antiochus the Great, the son of Callinicus, 
and at the same time married another daughter, called also 
Laodice, to Achaeus, the cousin of Antiochus. He did not allow 
these connections, however, to fetter his political action. In the 
war between Seleucus Callinicus and Antiochus Hierax, he sided 
with the latter, and on one occasion he inflicted a most severe 
defeat upon his brother-in-law, who lost 20,000 men. In b. c. 220^ 
he turned his arms against the Greeks of Sinope, but this town, 

u 2 



292 LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

which was assisted by the Rhodians^ appears to have maintained 
itself against his efforts. It is uncertain how long Mithridates III 
reigned, but the conjecture is reasonable that he died about 
B.C. 190. 

6. He was succeeded on the throne by his son, Pharnaces, who 
conquered Sinope, and made it the royal residence, about B.C. 183. 

This king soon afterwards involved himself in a war 

Pha^imces I, with Eumenes of Pergamus (see above, p. 383), of 

about B. c. whose greatly augmented power he had naturally 

become jealous. Rome endeavoured to hinder hosti- 
lities from breaking out, but in B.C. 181 Pharnaces took the field, 
overran Paphlagonia_, expelling the king, Morzes or Morzias_, and 
poured his troops into Cappadocia and Galatia. At first, he met 
with considerable success j but after a while the tide turned, and 
in B. c. 179 he was glad to make peace on condition of giving up 
all his conquests except the town of Sinope. After this we hear 
nothing more of him- but he seems to' have lived some consider- 
able time longer, probably till about b. c. 160. 

7. Pharnaces I was succeeded by his son, Mithridates, who took 
the name of ' Euergetes,' and reigned about forty years, from near 

B. c. 160 to 120. He entered into alliance with 

MithricMes IV, Attalus II, king of Pergamus, and lent him important 

about B.C. assistance in his wars with Prusias II of Bithynia. 

180-120. •' ' 

B.C. 154. A few years later he made alliance with 
Rome, and sent a contingent to bear a part in the Third Punic 
War, B.C. 150 to 146. He likewise assisted Rome in the war 
against Aristonicus, b. c, 131, and at its close received the Greater 
Phrygia as the reward of his services. His end was tragical. 
About B. c. 1 20, his own immediate attendants conspired against 
him, and assassinated him at Sinope, where he held his court. 

8. Mithridates, the elder of his two sons, succeeded, and took 
the title of ' Eupator,' for which, however, modern historians have 

Reign of generally substituted the more high-sounding epithet 

Mithridates V, of ' the Great.' He was undoubtedly the most able 
(the Great), , ,, , 

B.C. of all the Pontic kings, and will bear comparison 

120-64. with any of the Asiatic monarchs since Darius 

Hystaspis. Ascending the throne while he was still a minor, and 

entrusted to guardians whom he suspected, it was not till about 

B.C. 112 that he could undertake any important enterprise. But 

the interval of about eight years was well employed in the training 



FEB. III. PART IV.] PONTUS. 25I3 

of his own mind and body — the former by the study of languages, 
whereof he is said to have spoken twenty-five ; the latter by per- 
petual hunting expeditions in the roughest and most remote 
regions. On reaching the age of twenty,. and assuming the con- 
duct of affairs, he seems to have realised at once the danger of his 
position as ruler of a petty kingdom, which must, by its position 
upon her borders, be almost immediately attacked by Rome, and 
could not be expected to make any effectual resistance. Already, 
during his minority, the grasping republic had seized his province 
of Phrygia ; and this was felt to be merely a foretaste of the indig- 
nities and injuries with which, so long as he was weak, he would 
have to put up. Mithridates therefore determined, not unwisely, 
to seek to strengthen his kingdom, and to raise it into a condition 
in which it might be a match for Rome. With this object, in 
B.C. 112, he boldly started forth on a career of Eastern conquest. 
Here Rome could not interfere with him; and in the space of 
about seven years he had added to his dominions the His 

Lesser Armenia, Colchis, the entire eastern coast of conquests. 
the Black Sea, the Chersonesus Taurica, or kingdom of the 
Bosporus (the modern Crimea), and even the whole tract west- 
ward from that point to the Tyras, or Dniestr. Having thus 
enlarged his dominions, and having further strengthened himself 
by alliances with the wild tribes on the Danube, Getse, Sarmatse, 
and others, whom he hoped one day to launch upon Italy, he 
returned to Asia Minor, and commenced a series of intrigues and 
intermarriages, calculated to give him greater power in this 
quarter. 

Marriage of Mithridates' sister, Laodice, to Ariarathes VI, king of Cappa- 
docia, probably in the early part of his reign, about B.C. 120 to 115. Marriage 
of his daughter, Cleopatra, to Tigranes, king of the Greater Armenia, about 
B.C. 96. Alliance with Nicomedes II of Bithynia, for the partition of Paph- 
lagonia, B.C. 102. Occupation of Galatia the same year. First seizure of 
Cappadocia, and consequent war with Nicomedes (see above, p. 288), B.C. 96. 
Nicomedes defeated, and Ariarathes VII, son of Ariarathes VI and Laodice, 
set up. Quarrel picked with this prince by Mithridates, who invites him to 
a conference and murders him, about B.C. 94. Attempt to establish his own 
son on the Cappadocian throne fails, B.C. 93. Attempt to place Socrates on 
the throne of Bithynia, B. c. 90, also fails. 

9. Although it must have been evident, both to the Romans 
and to Mithridates, that peace between them could Rupture with 
not be maintained much longer, yet neither party ^^^yq^ 
was as yet prepared for an actual rupture. The b.c. 88-84. 
hands of Rome were tied by the condition of Italy, where 



294 LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

the <^ Social War' impended; and Mithridates regarded it as 
prudent to temporise a little longer. He therefore submitted, 
in B.C. 93, to the decree of the Roman Senate, which assigned Cap- 
padocia to a native monarch, Ariobarzanes, and in b. c. 90 to 
another decree which reinstated Nicomedes on the throne of 
Bithynia. When, however, in the following year, Nicomedes, 
encouraged by the Romans, proceeded to invade the Pontic 
kingdom, and the demand which Mithridates made for redress 
produced no result, it seemed to him that the time was come 
when he must change his policy, and, laying aside all pretence of 
friendliness, commence the actual struggle. 

First Roman "War. The war began, B.C. 88, with the invasion of Cappa- 
docia by Mithridates, who took possession of the country and drove out 
Ariobarzanes. Bithynia was then invaded, and the forces of Nicomedes were 
completely routed on the Amneius. His Roman alhes also suffered a severe 
defeat. Mithridates overran Galatia, Phrygia, and even the Roman province 
of Asia, becoming master of all Asia Minor except a few towns in Lycia 
and Ionia. Having taken up his winter quarters at Pergamus, he gave the 
fatal order that all Romans and Italians in Asia should on one day be mas- 
sacred—an order which was generally obeyed, and which caused the death of 
80,000 persons. The next year, B.C. 87, Mithridates sent his general, Arche- 
laiis, with a powerful fleet and army into Greece; and in B.C. 86 he sent 
a second army to reinforce the first under Taxilas. But the Romans under 
Sulla totally defeated the entire combined force at Chaeroneia in the same 
year, and Mithridates had to send over a third army, which he placed under 
the command of Dorylaiis. Hitherto the Pontic prince had been the assailant, 
and had kept the war in the enemy's country, but now a change occurred. 
A second Roman army under Fimbria, a Marian partisan, took the field, and 
carrying the war into Asia, made Mithridates tremble for his own territory. 
His generals lost a great battle in Bithynia, B.C. 85, and he himself, forced to 
become a fugitive, with difficulty avoided falling into his enemies' hands. Soon 
afterwards Archelaiis and Dorylaiis suffered a severe reverse in Greece ; 
and Mithridates felt himself obliged to sue for peace. The first negotiation 
was unsuccessful; but in B.C. 84 terms were agreed upon. The Pontic prince 
surrendered all his conquests, agreed to pay a sum of 2,000 talents (nearly half 
a million sterling) to indemnify Rome for the cost of the war, and also de- 
livered into the victor's hands a fleet of seventy ships. Nicomedes and 
Ariobarzanes were restored to their kingdoms, and the Roman authority 
was re-established in the province of ' Asia.' 

10. The disasters suffered by Mithridates in the Roman War 

encouraged the nations which he had subjected in the East to 

Revolts, and revolt. The kingdom of the Bosporus threw off its 

Second allegiance, the Colchians rebelled, and other nations 

Roman War, . , ' , ' , ^ 

B.C. in the same quarter showed symptoms of disaftec- 

83-82. ^^Qjj^ Mithridates proceeded to collect a large fleet 

and army for the reduction of the rebels, when his enterprise 

had to be relinquished on account of a second and wholly un- 

prgvoked Roman War. Murena,.the Roman commander in Asia, 



PER. III. PART IV.] PONTUS. 295 

suddenly attacked him, almost without a pretext, b. c. 83 ; and it 
was not till the close of the following year that peace was 
re-established. 

Second Roraan War. Murena invades Pontus at the instigation of Arche- 
laiis, who, having incurred the suspicion of ill faith, had fled from the court of 
his master and been received with honour by the Romans. Mithridates makes 
no resistance, but sends to Rome to complain, B.C. 83. The Senate by a 
legate commands Murena to desist ; but, disregarding the injunction, he pre- 
pares for a second invasion. Mithridates meets him on the banks of the 
Halys, and gains a complete victory. Murena escapes with difficulty into 
Phrygia, while Cappadocia is occupied by Mithridates. The Senate now sends 
a second legate, and peace is restored, Mithridates once more evacuating 
Cappadocia, B.C. 82. 

1 1 . The conclusion of the Second Roman War allowed Mithri- 
dates to complete the reduction of his revolted subjects, which he 
accomplished without much difficulty between the ^^ 

^ ' Preparations 

years b. c. 81 and 74. He suffered, however, during for the final 
this interval, some heavy losses in an attempt which ^^^"SS ^• 
he made to subdue the Achseans of the Caucasus. But it was not 
so much in wars as in preparations for war that the Pontic 
monarch employed the breathing-space allowed him by the Romans 
after the failure of the attack of Murena, Vast efforts were made 
by him to collect and discipline a formidable army ; troops were 
gathered from all quarters, even from the banks of the Danube ; 
the Roman arms and training were adopted ; fresh alliances were 
concluded or attempted j the fleet was raised to the number of 
400 triremes j nothing was left undone that care or energy 
could accomplish towards the construction of a power which might 
fairly hope to hold its own when the time for a final trial of 
strength with Rome should arrive. 

Alliance of Mithridates with Sertorius, about B.C. 75. Renewal of the 
alliance with Tigranes. Attempts to conclude treaties with Phraates, king 
of Parthia, and with various Scythic chiefs. Sarmatians, Scyths, and Bastarnae 
are induced to serve in the Pontic array. 

12. The armed truce might have continued some years longer, 
for Mithridates still hoped to increase his power, and Rome was 
occupied by the war in Spain against the rebel 

Sertorius, had not the death of Nicomedes III, king of the'TOTd 
of Bithynia, in b. c. 74, brought about a crisis. Roman War, 
That monarch, having no issue, followed the example 
of Attains, king of Pergamus, in leaving his dominions by will to 
the Roman people. Had Mithridates allowed Rome to Jake pos- 



296 LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

session, the Pontic kingdom would have been laid open to attack 

along the whole of its western border j Rome would have been 

brought within five days' march of Sinope ; and thus the position 

of Pontus, when war broke out, would have been greatly weakened. 

Mithridates therefore resolved to seize Bithynia before Rome could 

occupy it. But this act was equivalent to a declaration of war, 

since the honour of the great republic could not allow of her 

tamely submitting to the seizure of what she regarded as her 

own property. 

13. The Third War of Mithridates with Rome, which broke 

out in B. c. 74, was protracted to b. c. 6^.^ and thus lasted nearly 

nine years. The scene of the war was Asia. Its 
General ■' 

sketch of the result was scarcely doubtful from the first, for the 
Tfv.. S?!.fc! Asiatic levies of Mithridates, though armed after the 

01 the success ' o 

of the Roman fashion and disciplined to a certain extent, 
were no match for the trained veterans of the Roman 
legions. The protraction of the war was owing, in the first place, 
to the genius and energy of the Pontic monarch, who created 
army after army, and who gradually learnt the wisdom of avoiding 
pitched battles, and wasting the power of the enemy by cutting off 
his supplies, falling on his detachments, entangling him in difficult 
ground, and otherwise harassing and annoying him. It was further 
owing to the participation in it of a new foe, Tigranes, who 
brought to the aid of his neighbour and connection a force exceed- 
ing his own, and very considerable resources. Rome was barely 
capable of contending at one and the same time with two such 
kingdoms as those of Pontus and Armenia ; and up to the close of 
B. c. Sjj though her generals had gained many signal victories, she 
had made no great impression on either of her two adversaries. 
The war, if conducted without any change of plan, might still 
have continued for another decade of years, before the power of 
resistance possessed by the two kings would have been exhausted. 
But the genius of Pompey devised a scheme by which an immediate 
and decisive result was made attainable. His treaty with Phraates, 
king of Parthia, brought a new power into the field — a power fully 
capable of turning the balance in favour of the side whereto it 
attached itself. The attitude of Phraates at the opening of the 
campaign of b. c. 66 paralysed Tigranes ; and the Pontic monarch, 
deprived of the succours on which he had liitherto greatly de- 
pended, though he still resisted, and even fought a battle against 



PEE, III. PART IV.] PONTUS. 297 

his new antagonist, was completely and manifestly overmatched. 
Defeated near the Armenian border by the Romans under Pompey, 
and forbidden to seek a refuge in Armenia by his timid and suspi- 
cious brother-in-law, he had no choice but to yield his home domi- 
nions to the victor, and to retire to those remote territories of which 
he had become possessed by conquest. Even Pompey shrank from 
following his beaten foe into these inhospitable regions, and with 
the passage of Mithridates across the river Phasis, his third war 
with Rome came to an end. 

Details of the "War. B.C. 74. Advance of Mithridates through Bithynia. 
His victory over Cotta. Sieges of Ghalcedon and Cyzicus. — B.C. 73. Siege of 
Cyzicus abandoned. Great losses of Mithridates. His army defeated by 
Lucullus. Double defeat of his fleet. He, however, takes Heracleia Pontica, 
and, returning to his capital, raises a fresh army, and takes up a position at 
Cabeira. — B.C. 72. Lucullus besieges Amisus, but when Mithridates does not 
move to its relief, he raises the siege and marches upon Cabeira. Numerous 
partial encounters follow. At length Mithridates determines to move his 
camp, whereupon a panic ensues ; his army is attacked and routed, and he 
himself with difficulty escapes and flies to Tigranes, in Armenia. — B.C. 71 to 
70. A pause in the war now occurs, while the Romans endeavour to persuade 
Tigranes to surrender Mithridates. On his final refusal, B.C. 70, he too is 
declared a public enemy, and the war is transferred into his territories. — 
B.C. 69. Great victory of Lucullus over Tigranes, near Tigranocerta, and 
capture of that city. Inelfectual appeal of Mithridates to the Parthian king, 
Phraates. — B.C. 68. Second victory of LucuDus over Tigranes and Mithri- 
dates at Artaxata. Siege of Nisibis. Mithridates returns with an army to 
Pontus, defeats Fabius, and shuts him up in Cabeira.— B.C. 67. Great victory of 
Mithridates over Triarius : 7,000 Romans slain. Action of Lucullus paralysed 
by the disaffection of his soldiers. Mithridates and Tigranes recover Pontus 
and Cappadocia. — B.C. 66. Lucullus recalled, and Pompey sent into Asia. 
Treaty of friendship and alliance made with Phraates. Tigranes devotes all 
his eff"orts to the defence of his southern frontier. Mithridates retreats before 
Pompey, but is compelled to fight at great disadvantage, and loses almost his 
whole army. He flies to Synoria, where he once more collects a force, and 
prepares to move into Armenia ; but Tigranes declines to receive him, and he 
therefore retreats eastward, crosses the Phasis and winters at Dioscurias, in 
the modern Mingrelia. The war now comes to an end, though no peace is 
made, Mithridates having practically relinquished his kingdom and withdrawn 
to regions whither Rome does not care to follow him. 

14. Mithridates, in b.c. 6^^ retreated from Dioscurias to Panti- 

capaeum, and established himself in the old kingdom of the 

Bosporus. Such a principality was, however, too narrow for his 

ambition. Having vainly attempted to come to terms with 

Pompey, he formed the wild design of renewing the struggle with 

Rome by attacking her in a new quarter. It was his intention to 

proceed westward round the European side of the Black Sea, and 

to throw himself upon the Roman frontier, perhaps even to march 

upon Italy. But heither his soldiers nor his near relatives were 

willing to embark in so wild a project. Its announcement caused 



298 LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

general disafFection^ which at last ended in conspiracy. His own 
son, Pharnaces, headed the malcontents ; and the aged monarch, 
finding no support in any quarter, caused himself to be despatched 
by one of his guards, B.C. 6 '7^. The bulk of Pontus became a 
Roman province, though a portion continued till the time of Nero 
to be ruled by princes belonging to the old royal stock. 

Among works on the kingdom of Pontus may be mentioned the following: — 

Foy-Vaillant, J., Reges Ponti, in his Achcemenidarum Imperium (see above, 
p. 289). 

WOLTERSDORF, J. E., Commentatio -vitam Mithridatis Magni per annos dige- 
st am sistens. Gottingse, 1812. 

Clinton, H. F., Kings of Pontus^ in his Fasti Hellenici, vol. iii. Appendix, 
chap. viii. 



V. KINGDOM OP CAPPADOCIA. 

1. After the division of the Cappadocian satrapy into two pro- 
vinces, a northern and a southern (see p. 390), the latter continued 

subject to Persia, the government being, however, 

assume/by^ hereditary in a branch of the same family which had 

Ariarathes I, made itself independent in the northern province. 

B c. 331. 

The Datames and Ariamnes of Diodorus held this 
position, and are not to be regarded as independent kings. It was 
only when the successes of Alexander loosed the bands which held 
the Persian empire together (b.c. 331) that the satrap, Ariarathes, 
the son of Ariamnes, assumed the airs of independence^ and, 
resisting the attack of Perdiccas, was by him defeated, made a 
prisoner, and crucified, b.c. 322. 

2. Perdiccas, having subjected Cappadocia, made over his con- 
quest to Eumenes, who continued, nominally at any rate, its ruler 

until his death in b.c. 316. Cappadocia then revolted 

Ariarathes II, under Ariarathes II, the nephew of Ariarathes I, who 

about B.C. defeated and slew the Macedonian ereneral, Amyntas, 

315—280. J J J 

expelled the foreign garrisons, and re-established the 
independence of his country. No attempt seems to have been 
made to dispossess him either by Antigonus or Seleucus ; and Aria- 
rathes left his crown to the eldest of his sons, Ariamnes, probably 
about B.C. 280. 

3. The next two kings, Ariamnes, and his son, Ariarathes III, 
are little heard of in history : they appear to have reigned quietly 
but ingloriously. A friendly connection between the royal houses 



PER. III. PART IV.] CAPPADOCIA. 299 

of Cappadocia and Syria was established in the reign of the former, 
who obtained as a wife for his much-loved son, Reims of 
Stratonice, the daughter of Antiochus Theus. The Ariamnesand 

r A. ■ 1 A • 1 TTT Ariarathes III, 

two reigns or Ariamnes and Ariarathes ill appear to about b.c. 
have covered a space of about sixty years, from b.c. 280 28O-220. 
to 230. Ariarathes III left the crown to a son, bearing the same 
name, who was at the time of his father's death an infant. 

4. The reign of Ariarathes IV is remarkable as being that which 
ended the comparative isolation of Cappadocia, and brought the 
kingdom into close relation with the other monar- 
chies of Asia Minor, and not only with them, but AriaraAes IV, 
also with the great republic of the West. The ^•^• 

° ^ 220-162. 

history of Cappadocia is henceforth inextricably 
intermixed with that of the other kingdoms of Western Asia, and 
has been to a great extent anticipated in what has been said of 
them. Ariarathes IV, who was the first cousin of Antiochus the 
Great, married in b. c. 192 his daughter, Antiochis, and being thus 
doubly connected with the Seleucid family, entered into close 
alliance with the Syrian king, assisted him in his war against 
Rome, and bore his part in the great battle of Magnesia by which 
the power of the Syrian empire was broken, b. c. 190. Having 
thus incurred the hostility of the Romans, and at the same time 
become sensible of the greatness of their power, Ariarathes pro- 
ceeded, in B.C. 188, to deprecate their wrath, and by an alliance 
with the Roman protege, Eumenes, which was cemented by a mar- 
riage, succeeded in appeasing the offended republic and obtained 
favourable terms. Ariarathes then assisted Eumenes in his war 
with Pharnaces of Pontus, b.c. 183 to 179, after which he was 
engaged in a prolonged quarrel with the Gauls of Galatia, who 
•wished to annex a portion of his territory. He continued on the 
most friendly terms with Rome from the conclusion of peace in 
B.C. 188 till his death in the winter of b.c. 163-2. His reign 
lasted fifty-eight years. 

Ariarathes IV must have been married at least twice. By his first wife he 
had a daughter, married to Eumenes of Pergamus, in B.C. 188. By his second, 
Antiochis, the daughter of Antiochus the Great, he had a son, Mithridates, who 
took the name of Ariarathes at his accession. He had also two other reputed 
sons by Antiochis, Ariarathes, and Holophernes or Orophernes, supposititious 
children whom Antiochis had imposed upon him when she thought herself 
barren. 

5. Ariarathes V, surnamed 'Philopator' from the affection 



3 00 ■ LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

which he bore his father, maintained the alliance between Cappa- 

docia and Rome with great fidelity. Solicited by 

Ariarathes V, Demetrius Soter to enter into alliance with him and 

^•^- to connect his family with that of the Seleucidae 

162-131. ^ 

once more by a marriage, he declined out of regard 
for Rome. Angered by his refusal, Demetrius set up against him 
the pretender, Orophernes, b. c. 158, and for a time deprived him 
of his kingdom. The Romans, however, with the help of Attalus II, 
restored him in the year following. After this Ariarathes lent 
Attalus important aid in his war with Prusias of Bithynia, b. c. i 56 
to 154, and when Aristonicus attempted to resist the Roman 
occupation of that province, b. c. 133, he joined the Romans in 
person, and lost his life in their cause, b. c. 131. 

The character of Ariarathes V stands out in remarkable contrast to those 
of almost all his contemporaries. He was a student of philosophy, and made 
Cappadocia a residence of learned men. Out of respect for his father he 
would accept no share in the government during his Hfetime. When Artaxias 
of Armenia suggested to him an iniquitous appropriation of a neighbouring 
kingdom, he not only declined the overture, but was indignant that it had been 
made to him. No cruel or perfidious deed of his doing is upon record. He 
conciliated the affection of his subjects and commanded the respect of his 
neighbours. The history of the three centuries after Alexander shows us no 
other monarch who led so pure and blameless a life. 

6. Ariarathes V seems to have left behind him as many as six 

sons, none of whom, however, had reached maturity. Laodice, 

, therefore, the queen-mother, became regent; and. 
Regency of u .- j 1 u 

Laodic^, being an ambitious and unscrupulous woman, she 

A^-i^^-aThS'vi contrived to poison five out of her six sons before 

B. c. they were of age to reign, and so kept the government 

in her own hands. One, the youngest, was preserved, 

like the Jewish king^ Joash, by his near relatives ; and, after the 

death of Laodice, who fell a victim to the popular indignation, he 

ascended the throne under the name of Ariarathes VI. Little is 

known of this king, except that he made alliance with Mithridates 

the Great, and married a sister of that monarch, named also Laodice, 

about B.C. 115. By her he had two sons, both named Ariarathes. 

He was murdered by an emissary of Mithridates, b. c. 96, when his 

sons were just growing into men. 

7. On the removal of Ariarathes VI, his dominions were seized 
Reigns of ^7 ^^^ brother-in-law, Mithridates, who designed to 

Ariarathes VII, assume the rule of them himself; but Laodice, the 
widow of the late king, having called in the aid of Nicomedes II, 



PER. in. PART IV.] CAPPADOCIA. 301 

king of Bithynia, whom she married, Mithridates, in order to retain 
his hold on Cappadocia, found it necessary to allow the and 

country its own monarch, and accordingly set up as ^"^^'^^^es VIII, 
king, B. c. 96 or 95, Ariarathes VII, elder son of Aria- 96-93. 
rathes VI, and consequently the legitimate monarch. This prince, 
however, showing himself too independent, Mithridates, in b. c. 94, 
invited him to a conference and slew him • after which he placed 
on the throne a son of his own, aged eight years, whose name 
he changed to Ariarathes. But the Cappadocians rOse in rebellion 
against this attempt, and raised to the throne another Ariarathes, 
the son of Ariarathes VI, and the younger brother of Ariarathes VII, 
who endeavoured to establish himself, but was driven out by 
Mithridates and died shortly afterwards. By the death of this 
prince the old royal family of Cappadocia became extinct j and 
though pretenders to the throne, claiming a royal descent, were 
put forward both by Mithridates and Nicomedes, yet, as the nullity 
of these claims was patent, Rome permitted the Cappadocians 
to choose themselves a new sovereign, which they did in b. c. 935 
when Ariobarzanes was proclaimed king. 

8. Ariobarzanes had scarcely ascended the throne when he was 
expelled by Tigranes, king of Armenia, and forced to fly to Rome 
for protection. The Romans reinstated him in the 

next year, b. c. 92 i and he reigned in peace for four Ariobarzanes I, 
years, b. c. 93 to 88, when he was again ejected, this ^•^• 

time by Mithridates, who seized his territories, and 
retained possession of them during the whole of his first war with the 
Romans. At the peace, made in b. c. 84, Ariobarzanes was once 
more restored. He now continued undisturbed till b. c. 67, when 
Mithridates and Tigranes in combination drove him from his 
kingdom for the third time, after which, in b. c. 66, he received 
his third restoration at the hands of Pompey. About two years 
later he abdicated in favour of his son, Ariobarzanes. 

9. Ariobarzanes II, the friend of Cicero, began to reign probably 
in B.C. 64. He took the titles of ^Eusebes' (the Pious) and 
' Philorhomgeus ' (lover of the Romans) , and appears to 

have aimed steadily at deserving the latter appellation. Ariobarf anes II, 
It was difficult, however, to please all parties in the b- ^■ 

. ' 3 r r 64-42. 

Civil wars. Ariobarzanes sided with Pompey against 

Caesar, and owed it to the magnanimity of the latter that he was 

not deprived of his kingdom after Pharsalia, but forgiven and 



302 LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

allowed an increase of territory. In the next civil war he was 
less fortunate. Having ventured to oppose the 'Liberators/ he 
was seized and put to death by Cassius, B.C. 43, after he had 
reigned between twenty-one and twenty-two years. 

10. After Philippi, Antony conferred the crown of Cappadocia 
on Ariarathes IX, the son (apparently) of the last king. It was 

^ . , not lone;, however, before this prince lost his favour- 
Reigns of , , , 
Ariarathes IX and, in B.C. ^6^ he was put to death by Antony s 
and Archelaus. ^^^^^^^ ^}^q Wanted his throne for Archelaiis, one 
of his creatures. Archelaiis, the grandson of Mithridates' general 
of the same name, ruled Cappadocia from B.C. '^6 to a.d. 15, when 
he was summoned to Rome by Tiberius, who had been offended 
by the circumstance that Archelaiis paid him no attention when 
he was in voluntary exile at Rhodes. Archelaiis in vain endea- 
voured to excuse himself : he was retained at Rome by the tyrant, 
and died there, either of a disease, or possibly by his own hand, 
about A.D. 17. His kingdom was then reduced into the form of a 
Roman province. 

On the Cappadocian history, see Clinton's Kings of Cappadocia, in his 
Fasti Helknici, vol. iii. Appendix, chap. ix. 



VI. KINGDOM OF THE GEEATER ARMENIA. 

I. Armenia, which, from the date of the battle of Ipsus, B.C. 301, 

formed a portion of the empire of the Seleucidse, revolted on the 

Independence defeat of Antiochus ' the Great by the Romans, 

established, B.C. 1 90, and became split up into two kingdoms, 
Early Armenia Major and Armenia Minor, the latter 

monarchs. lying on the west bank of the Euphrates. The first 
king of Armenia Major was Artaxias, who had been a general 
of Antiochus. He built Artaxata, the capital, and reigned pro- 
bably about twenty-five years, when he was attacked, defeated, 
and made prisoner by Antiochus Epiphanes, about b.c. 165, who 
recovered Armenia to the Syrian empire. How long the sub- 
jection continued is uncertain; but about b.c. 100 we find an 
Armenian king mentioned, who seems to be independent, and 
who carries on war with the Parthian monarch, Mithridates. 
This king, who is called by Justin Ortoadistes, appears to have 
been succeeded, b. c. 96, by the greatest of the Armenian 
monarchs, Tigranes I, who took the part already described 



PEB. III. PART IV.] GREATER ARMENIA. 303 

{supra, p. 296) in the great war between Mithridates of Pontus 
and the Romans. 

2. Tigranes I, who was a descendant of Artaxias, raised Ar- 
menia from the condition of a petty kingdom to a powerful and 
extensive empire. Compelled in his early years to Reign of 
purchase a peace of the Parthians by a cession of Tigranes I, 
territory, he soon afterwards, about b.c. 90 to 87, 96-55. 
not only recovered his provinces, but added to his -^^^ ^^""^^ "^^^^' 
dominions the important countries of Atropatene and Gordyene 
(or Upper Mesopotamia), chastising the Parthian monarch on his 
own soil, and gaining for himself a great reputation. He then 
determined to attack the Syrian kingdom, which was verging to its 
fall under Philip, son of Grypus. Having crossed the Euphrates, 
he easily made himself master of the entire Syrian territory, 
including the province of Cilicia ; and for fourteen years, b. c. 83 
to 69, his dominions reached across the whole of Western Asia, 
from the borders of Pamphylia to the shores of the Caspian. 
It was during these years that he founded his great 

., , ^ rr>- i J • rr War with the 

capital or i igranocerta, and gave grievous offence Romans, 
to Rome by his conduct towards her protes:L Ariobar- ^•^• 

^ r & 3 69-66. 

zanes of Cappadocia, whose territory he ravaged, 
B.C. 75, carrying off more than 300,000 people. Soon afterwards 
he added to the offence by receiving and supporting Mithridates, 
and thus he drew the Roman arms upon himself and his kingdom. 

War of Tigranes with Rome. B.C. 69. Tigranes invades Lycaonia. 
Lucullus proceeds into Armenia, defeats Mithrobarzanes, and threatens 
Tigranocerta. Tigranes marches to the relief of his capital. Great battle 
between the two armies. Tigranes completely defeated. Tigranocerta falls. 
Defection of Syria, which is given to Antiochus Asiaticus, the son of Eusebes. 
— B.C. 68. Tigranes, accompanied by Mithridates, retreats to the Armenian 
highlands, whither they are followed by Lucullus. Battle near Artaxata, 
another Roman victory. Disaffection of the troops of Lucullus prevents any 
further successes. Lucullus quits Armenia, and marches southwards into 
Mesopotamia. Siege and fall of Nisibis. — B.C. 67. Tigranes and Mithridates take 
the offensive ; the latter recovers Pontus ; the former re-occupies Cappadocia, 
and invades Armenia Minor. The movements of Lucullus are paralysed 
by the disaffection of his troops. — B. c. 66. Command of Pompey, who allies 
himself with the Parthian king, Phraates. Rebellion of the young Tigranes, 
who is supported by Phraates against his father. Invasion of Armenia by 
Phraates. Second invasion, later in the year, by Pompey. Submission 
of Tigranes. Terms granted him. 

3. The result of the war with Rome was the loss by Tigranes 
of all his conquests. He retained merely his original kingdom 
of the Greater Armenia. The fidelity, however, which he showed 



304 LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

towards Pompey led to the enlargement of his dominions^ b.c. 6^, 
Later years ^7 ^^^ addition of Gordyene • and the Roman 
ofTigi-anes. alliance was otherwise serviceable to him in the 
war which he continued to wage with Parthia. He appears to 
have died about b.c. ^c^^ eleven years after the conclusion of his 
peace with Rome, and one year before the expedition of Crassus. 

4. Tigranes was succeeded by his son, Artavasdes I, who began 
his reign by following out the later policy of his father, and en- 
deavouring to keep on good terms with the Romans. 

Artavasdes I, He bore a part in the great expedition of Crassus 
B.C. against the Parthians, b.c. 54 j and it was only when 

Orodes, the Parthian king, advanced against him, 
and he was unable to obtain any assistance from Rome, that 
he consented to a Parthian alliance, and gave his daughter in 
marriage to Orodes' son, Pacorus. This led him, when Pacorus 
invaded Syria, B.C. 51, to take up an attitude of hostility to the 
Romans. But, at a later date, when, Antony threatened the 
Parthians, b.c. 36^ he again espoused the Roman side, and took 
part in that general's expedition into Media Atropatene-, which 
turned out unfortunately. Antony attributed his repulse to Arta- 
vasdes deserting him in his difficulties^ and therefore invaded his 
country, in b. c. 34, obtained possession of his person^ and carried 
him into captivity. Cleopatra afterwards, b.c. 30, put Artavasdes 
to death. 

It is worth remark that there was a considerable degree of culture in 
Armenia at this period. Its character was Greek. Tigranes I struck coins 
with a Greek legend. Artavasdes I wrote speeches, tragedies, and even 
historical works in the Greek language. 

5. On the captivity of Artavasdes^ the Armenians conferred the 
royal dignity on Artaxias II, his son. At first the Romans^ in con- 
junction with Artavasdes of Atropatene, drove him 

Reign of "^ , . . , , , ^ 

Artaxias II, out ^ but during the struggle between Octavius and 

34-19 Antony he returned, defeated the Atropatenian mo- 
narch, and took him prisoner. At the same time, 
he gave command for a massacre of all the Romans in Armenia, 
which accordingly took place. He reigned from b.c. 34 to 19, 
when he was murdered by his relations. 

6. The Romans now brought forward a candidate for the throne 
in the person of Tigranes, the brother of Artaxias II, who was 
installed in his kingdom by Tiberius at the command of Augustus, 



PER. III. PAET IV.] BACTRIA. 305 

and ruled the country as Tigranes II. From this time Armenian 
independence was really at an end. The titular monarchs were 
mere puppets^ maintained in their position by the Roman em- 
perors or the Parthian kings, who alternately exercised a pre- 
ponderating influence over the country. At length Armenia was 
made into a Roman province by Trajan, b.c. 114. 

A general History of Armenia from the earliest times to his own day was 
written in the Armenian language by Moses Chorenensis, about A. D. 430 
to 450. It embodies the national traditions, and possesses thus a certain 
amount of interest ; but it is contradicted by classical writers, contemporary 
with the events, on so many points that it cannot be regarded as possessing 
more than a very slight historical value. This work was translated into Latin 
by Whiston, and published in a single 4to volume. London, 1736. 

Lists of the Armenian kings from Artaxias downwards have been collected 
by Foy-Vaillant, in his Arsacidarum Imperium (Appendix, Elenchus regum 
ArmenicB Majoris), by Brotier in his notes to Tacitus (vol. i. pp. 426 to 428), 
and others. 

VII. KINGDOM OP ARMENIA MINOR. 

The kingdom of Armenia Minor was founded by Zariadras^ 
a general of Antiochus the Great, about the same time that 
Artaxias founded the kingdom of Armenia Major, 
i.e. about b.c. 190. It continued a separate state, the kingdom, 
governed by the descendants of the founder, till the ^^^"^ ^•^- ■'■^^ 

° ■' ' tOA.D. 73. 

time of Mithridates of Pontus, when it was annexed 
to his dominions by that ambitious prince. Subsequently it fell 
almost wholly under the power of the Romans, and was generally 
attached to one or other of the neighbouring kingdoms, until the 
reign of Vespasian, when it was converted into a Roman province. 
The names of the early kings after Zariadras are unknown. 
Among the later were a Cotys, contemporary with Caligula, 
A.D. 47, and an Aristobulus, contemporary with Nero, a.d. 54. 
The latter prince belonged to the family of the Herods. 

VIII. KINGDOM OP BACTRIA. 

I. The Bactrian satrapy was for some time after the death of 
Alexander only nominally subject to any of the so-called * Suc- 
cessors.' But, about B.C. 305, Seleucus Nicator in 
his Oriental expedition received the submission of kmgdom, ^ 
the governor: and from that date till the reign ^-bout 

B C 255 

of his grandson, Antiochus Theus, Bactria continued 

to be a province of the Syrian empire. Then, however, the 

X 



3o6 LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

personal character of Antiochus Theus, and his entanglement in 
a war with Ptolemy Philadelphus, which taxed his powers to 
the utmost, encouraged the remoter provinces to revolt j and 
about B.C. 255, Diodotus, satrap of Bactria, declared himself 
independent, and became the founder of the Bactrian kingdom. 

2. Little is known of Diodotus I beyond the date, of his acces- 
sion, and the fact of the continuance of his reign from about B.C. 255 

to 237. It is possible that about b. c. 244 he 

Diodotus I, (nominally at any rate) submitted to Ptolemy Euer- 

about B. 0. getes J and probable that when Seleucus Callinicus 

made his first attack on Parthia, Diodotus lent him 

assistance, and obtained in return an acknowledgment of his 

independence. He appears to have died during the expedition 

of Callinicus, which is assigned probably to the year b.c. 237. 

At his death he left the crown to a son of the same name. 

It is to be borne in mind that the Bactrian kingdom was in its origin purely 
Greek, and that thus it stands in marked contrast with the Parthian. The 
coins of Diodotus I are excellent in type ; they have wholly Greek legends. 

3. Diodotus II, who succeeded Diodotus I about b.c. 237, pursued 
a policy quite different from that of his father. Instead of 

Reign of lending aid to Callinicus, he concluded a treaty with 
Diodotus II. Arsaces II (Tiridates)^ the Parthian king, and pro- 
bably assisted him in the great battle by v/hich Parthian in- 
dependence was regarded as finally established. Nothing more 
is known- of this king- nor can it even be determined whether 
it was he or his son who was removed by Euthydemus, when that 
prince seized the crown, about b.c. 222. 

4. Euthydemus, the third loiown Bactrian king, was a Greek 
of Magnesia, in Asia Minor. The circumstances under which 

he seized the crown are unknown to us j but it 

Euthydemus, appears that he had been king for some considerable 

about B.C. time when Antiochus the Great, having made peace 

222-200. 3 o r 

with Arsaces, the third Parthian monarch, turned his 
arms against Bactria with the view of reducing it to subjection. 
In a battle fought on the Arius (Heri-Rud), Euthydemus was 
defeated; but Antiochus, who received a wound in the engage- 
ment, shortly after granted him terms, promised to give one of his 
daughters in marriage to Demetrius, Euthydemus' son^ and left 
him in quiet possession of his dominions, b.c. 206. The Indian 
conquests of Demetrius seem to have commenced soon afterwards. 



PER. III. PABT IV.] BACTRIA. 307 

while his father was still living. They were on the south side 
of the Paropamisus, in the modern Candahar and Cabul. 

5. Demetrius, who is proved by his coins to have been king 
of Bactria, no doubt succeeded his father. He engaged in an 
important series of conquests — partly as crown 

prince, partly as king — on the southern side of the Demetrius 
Paropamisus, which extended probably over the about b.c. 

? r . ^ . ■ , , 200-180. 

greater portion of Aftghanistan, and may even have 
embraced some districts of the Punjab region. The city of Deme- 
trias in Arachosia, and that of Euthydemeia on the Hydaspes, are 
with reason regarded as traces of these conquests. While Deme- 
trius was thus employed, a rebel named Eucratides seems to have 
supplanted him at home j and the reigns of these monarchs were 
for some time parallel, Demetrius ruling on the south and 
Eucratides on the north side of the mountains. 

The dates for the accession and death of Demetrius are exceedingly 
doubtful. The best authorities assign him, conjecturally, the space from 
about B.C. 200 to 180. 

6. After the death of Demetrius, Eucratides appears to have 
reigned over both kingdoms. He was a monarch of considerable 
vigour and activity, and pushed his conquests deep 

into the Punjab region. He lost, however, a portion Eucratides, 
of his home territory to the Parthian princes. On about b.c. 

IftO— IfiO 

his return from an Indian expedition he was waylaid 
and slain by his own son, whom he had previously associated 
in the kingdom. His reign must have lasted from about b. c. i 80 
to J 60. g ^, 

7. The son of D^metrnts-, who after his murder became sole 
monarch of Bactria, appears to have been a certain Heliocles, 
who took the title of At'/caios, 'the Just,' and reigned 

over Bactria probably from about b.c. 160 to 150. Hel^les 
Nothing is known in detail of the circumstances ^^out b. c. 

ri-- 1^.1 ,,• ,. 160-150. 

or his reign; but there is reason to believe that 
Bactria now rapidly declined in power, being pressed upon by the 
Scythian nomades towards the north, and by the Parthians on the 
west and south, and continually losing one province after another 
to the invaders. It was in vain that these unhappy 
Greeks implored in their isolation the aid of their of Bactrian 
Syrian brethren against the constant encroachments power. 
of the barbarians. The expedition of Demetrius Nicator, under- 

X % 



3o8 LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

taken for their relief, b.c. 142, terminated in his defeat and 
capture. Hellenic culture and civilisation proved in this quarter 
no match for barbaric force, and had of necessity to give way and 
retreat. After the reign of Heliocles, we have no further in- 
dication of Greek rulers to the north of the Paropamisus. On the 
southern side of the mountain-chain somewhat more of tenacity 
was shown. In Cabul and Candahar Greek kingdoms, offshoots 
of the Bactrian, continued to exist down to about b.c. 80, when 
the last remnant of Hellenic power in this quarter was swept 
away by the Yue-chi and other Scythic, or Tatar, races. 

To these Indian, rather than Bactrian, kingdoms belong the names of Lysias 
(about B.C. 160), Antimachus (same date), Apollodotus (same date), Menan- 
der (B.C. 140), Philoxenes (same date), Anticleides, Archebius, Diomedes 
(about B.C. 100), Hermaeus (same date), and others, whose coins, which have 
Greek legends, show them to have reigned in these regions. No great histo- 
rical interest attaches to any of these kings except Menander. Menander was 
a powerful monarch, who held his court probably at the city of Cabul, and 
ruled over the whole tract extending from the Paropamisus on the north to the 
Indian Ocean towards the south, and from the neighbourhood of Herat on the 
one side, to the Jumna, a tributary of the Ganges^ on the other. His coins are 
found in the Hazarah country, west of Cabul, at Cabul itself, at Peshawur, and 
on the banks of the Jumna. In the first century after Christ they were current 
on the coast of Guzerat, and about the mouths of the Indus. There is reason 
therefore to believe that Strabo did not exaggerate his power, which probably 
lasted for about a quarter of a century in the regions mentioned. 

On the Grseco-Bactrian history, see the following works : — 

Bayer, T. S., Historia regni Gracorum Bactriani. Petropol., 1738 ; 4to. 
The earliest, and, so far as the notices of the ancients go, the most complete 
work on the subject. 

Wilson, Prof. H. H., Ariana Antiqua (chap. iv.). London, 1841 ; 4to. 
Contains a full and excellent account and representation of the Grseco- 
Bactrian coins. 

Lassen, Prof., Indische Alterthumskunde. Bonn, 1849 ; 2 vols, tall 8vo. See 
particularly the section entitled Geschkhte der Griechisch-Baktrischen Konige^ 
vol. ii. pp. 277 to 344. 

Special works on the Coins of Bactria and the adjoining countries are nume- 
rous. Among them the following deserve attention : — 

Raoul-Rochette, Notice sur quelques me dailies grecques tftedites, appartenant 
a des rots inconnus de Bactriane et de I'Inde, published in the Journal des Sa^vants 
for 1834 ; pp. 328 et seqq. 

Grotefend, C. L., Die Munzen der griechischen, parthischen, und indoskythi- 
schen Konige 'von Baktrien und den Landern am Indus. Hannover, 1839. 



IX. KINGDOM OP PARTHIA. 

The Parthian kingdom is said to have been founded nearly at 

Parthian ^^ Same time with the Bactrian, during the reign 

kingdom, from of Antiochus Theus in Syria, about b. c. -i^^ or 1^6. 

to A.D. 226. It originated, however, not in the revolt of a 



PER. III. PAET IV.] JUDjEA. 309 

satrap, but in the uprising of a nation. Reinforced by a 
kindred body of Turanians from beyond the Jaxartes, the Parthi of 
the region lying south-east of the Caspian rose in revolt against 
their Grecian masters_, and succeeded in establishing their inde- 
pendence. From a small beginning they gradually spread their 
power over the greater part of Western Asia, being for a con- 
siderable period lords of all the countries between the Euphrates 
and the Sutlej. As the Parthian kingdom, though a fragment of 
the empire of Alexander, was never absorbed into that of the 
Romans, but continued to exist side by side with the Roman empire 
during the most flourishing period of the latter, it is proposed to 
reserve the details of the history for the next Book, and to give 
only this brief notice of the general character of the monarchy in 
the present place. 



X. KINGDOM OP 3VDMK. 

I. Though the Jewish kingdom, which came into being midway 
in the Syrian period, originating in the intolerable cruelties and 
oppressions of the Syrian kings, was geographically j 
of such small extent as scarcely to claim distinct of Jewish 
treatment in a work which must needs omit to ^^ °^^' 

notice many of the lesser states and kingdoms, yet the undying 
interest which attaches to the Jewish people, and the vast influence 
which the nation has exercised over the progress of civilisation, 
will justify, it is thought, in the present place, not only an account 
of the kingdom, but a sketch of the general history of the nation 
from the time when, as related in the first Book (p. ^'^)j it was 
carried into captivity by Nebuchadnezzar to the period of the re- 
establishment of independence. This history naturally divides itself 
into two periods: — i. From the Captivity to the fall of the Persian 
empire, b. c. 586 to '^%'^ ; and 2. From the fall of 
the Persian empire to the re-establishment of an 
independent kingdom, b. c. ^2^ to 168. The history of the king- 
dom may also be most conveniently treated in two portions: — 
I. The Maccabee period, from b. c. 168 to 375 and 2,. The period 
of the Herods, b. c. 37 to a.d. 44, when Judsea became finally 
a Roman province. Thus the entire history will fall under four 
heads. 



3IO LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

2. First Period. About fifty years after the completion of the 

Captivity by Nebuchadnezzar, and nearly seventy years after its 

First period, commencement, a great change was effected in the 

B-c- condition of the Jewish people by Cyrus. That 

586—323 1. i. J J 

Return from monarch, having captured Babylon in the year 
captivity. g^ c. 538, found among his new subjects an oppressed 
race^ in whose religion he recognised a considerable resemblance 
to his own, and in whose fortunes he therefore took a special 
interest. Learning that they had been violently removed from 
their own country two generations previously, and finding that 
numbers of them had a strong desire to return, he gave permission 
that such as wished might go back and re-establish themselves in 
their country. Accordingly, a colony, numbering 43,360 persons, 
besides their servants, set out from Babylonia, and made their 
way to Jerusalem ; in or near which the greater number of them 
settled. This colony, at the head of which was Zerubbabel, a de- 
scendant of the old line of kings, was afterwards strengthened by 
two others, one led by Ezra, in b. c. 458, and the other by Nehe- 
miah, in b. c. 445. Besides these known accessions, there was 
probably also for many years a continual influx of individuals, 
or families, who were attracted to their own land, not only by the 
love of country, which has always been so especially strong in the 
Jews, but also by motives of religion. Still great numbers of Jews, 
probably half the nation, remained where they had so long resided, 
in Babylonia and the adjoining countries. 

3. The exiles who returned under Zerubbabel belonged predomi- 
nantly, if not exclusively, to three tribes, Judah, Levi, and Benjamin. 
It was their first object to rebuild their famous Temple 
rebuilt, on its former site, and to re-establish the old Temple- 
535-515 service. But in this work they were greatly hindered 
by their neighbours. A mixed race, partly Israelite, 
partly foreign— including Babylonians, Persians, Elamites, Arabs, 
and others — had repeopled the old kingdom of Samaria, and estab- 
lished there a mongrel worship, in part Jehovistic, in part idolatrous. 
On the first arrival of the Jewish colony, this mixed race proposed 
to join the new-comers in the erection of their Temple, and to 
make it a common sanctuary open both to themselves and the 
Jews. But such a course would have been dangerous to the purity 
of religion ^ and Zerubbabel very properly declined the offer. His 
refusal stirred up a spirit of hostility among the 'Samaritans' j 



PER. III. PAET IV.] JUDjEA. 311 

which showed itself in prolonged efForts to prevent the rebuilding 
of the Temple and the city — efForts which were for a while 
successful, considerably delaying, though they could not finally 
defeat, the work. 

Building of Temple commenced about B.C. 535. Work stopped by a 
rescript of the pseudo-Smerdis (Artaxerxes of Ezra iv. 7-23), about B.C. 522, 
Resumed, B.C. 519, in consequence of a decree of Darius Hystaspis. Com- 
pletion of Temple, B.C. 515. 

4. The favour of Darius Hystaspis allowed the Jews to complete 
their Temple, and to establish themselves firmly in the country of 
their ancestors, despite the ill-will of the surrounding -^^^ ^^ ^^ ^^^ 
nations and tribes. But in the reign of his successor, Jews. 
Xerxes, a terrible danger was incurred. That weak massacre 
prince allowed his minister, Haman (Omanes?), to averted by the 

r interposition of 

persuade him that it would be for the advantage of Esther, about 
his empire, if the Jews, who were to be found in ^•°" ^'^^- 
various parts of his dominions, always a distinct race, not amalga- 
mating with those among whom they lived, could be quietly got 
rid of. Having obtained the monarch's consent, he planned and 
prepared a general massacre, by which on one day the whole race 
was to be swept from the earth. Fortunately for the doomed 
nation, the inclination of the fickle king had shifted before the 
day of execution came, the interposition of the wife in favour at 
the time, who was a Jewess, having availed for the preservation of 
her people. Instead of being taken unawares by their enemies, and 
massacred unresistingly, the Jews were everywhere warned of their 
danger and allowed to stand on their defence. The weight of the 
government was thrown on their side j and the result was that, wher- 
ever they were attacked, they triumphed, and improved their future 
position by the destruction of all their most bitter adversaries. 

The ' Ahasuerus ' of the Book of Esther has been identified by writers of 
repute with Darius Hystaspis and with Artaxerxes Longimanus, as well as 
with Xerxes. But the notes of time, character, and name, which all point 
to Xerxes, have produced among moderns almost a consensus in his favour. 
The historical character of the narrative is proved by the institution of the 
feast of Purim, which is still kept by the Jews, and of which no other account 
can be given. 

5. Though the Jews had thus escaped this great danger, and had 
strengthened their position by the destruction of so many of their 
enemies, yet their continued existence as a separate nation was 
still far from secure. Two causes imperilled it. In spite of the 
refusal to allow foreigners, even though partially allied in race, to 



312 LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

take part in the rebuilding of the Temple, a tendency showed itself, 

„ , as time went on, towards a fusion with the surround- 

Tendency to ^ 

'' intermixture ing peoples. The practice of intermarriage with these 

^checkel^y^^ peoples commenced, and had gained a great head 

Ezra and when Ezra brought his colony from Babylon in the 

emia . ggyenth year of Longimanus, b.c. 458. By the 

earnest efforts, first of Ezra, and then of Nehemiah, about 

B.c, 434, this evil was checked. 

6. The other peril was of a different kind. Jerusalem, though 

rebuilt on the old site by the colony of Zerubbabel, was without 

^ ,.. ,. walls or other defences, and thus lay open to attack 
Fortification ' ^ ^ 

of Jerusalem, on the part of any hostile neighbour. The authority 
B.C. 445. q£ Persia was weak in the more remote provinces, 
which not unfrequently revolted, and remained for years in a state 
bordering on anarchy. It was an important gain to the Jews when, 
in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes, Nehemiah came down from 
the court with authority to refortify the city, and effected his 
purpose despite the opposition which he encountered^ b.c. 445. 

7. It was a feature of the Persian system to allow the nations 
under their rule a good deal of self-government and internal inde- 
pendence. Judaea was a portion of the Syrian satrapy, 

administration ^^^ ^'^^'^ ^^ doubt to Submit to such requisitions as 
under the i\-^q Syrian satrap made upon it for men and money. 
But, so long as these requisitions were complied with, 
there was not much further interference with the people, or with 
their mode of managing their own affairs. Occasionally a local 
governor (Tirshatha), with a rank and title below those of a 
satrap, was appointed by the Crown to superintend Judaea, or Jeru- 
salem; but these officers do not appear to have succeeded each 
other with regularity, and, when they were appointed, it would 
seem that they were always natives. In default of a regular 
succession of such governors, the High Priests came to be 
regarded as not merely the religious but also the political heads 
of the nation, and the general direction of affairs fell into their 
hands. 

Line of High Priests from the commencement to the close of the Persian 
period: — 1. Jeshua, B.C. 536 to 515. Contemporary with Zerubbabel, Haggai, 
and Zechariah. 2. Joiakim, son of Jeshua, about B.C. 500 to 460. 3. Eliashib, 
son of Joiakim, B.C. 458 to 434. Contemporary with Ezra and Nehemiah. 
4. Joiada, son of Eliashib, about B.C. 430 to 400. Contemporary with Darius 
Nothus. 5. Jonathan, son of Joiada, about b.c 400 to 360. Contemporary 
with Artaxerxes Mnemon. Murders his brother Jeshua. 6. Jaddua, son of 



PER. III. PART IV.] JUDJEA. 



313 



Jonathan, about B.C. 360 to 330, Contemporary with Darius Codomannus. 
After the fall of Tyre, yields Jerusalem to Alexander the Great. 

8. Second Period. In the partitions which were made of 
Alexander's dominions at Babylon and at Triparadisus (see above, 
pp. 210 and 213), the Syrian satrapy, which included 
Palestine, was constituted a separate government, /he Pk)lemies 
But a very little time elapsed before Ptolemy Lagi '^^^^ 

y D 320—203. 

annexed the satrapy, the southern division of which 

continued thenceforward, except during short intervals, a portion 

of the kingdom of Egypt, until the reign of Ptolemy Epiphanes. 

It is uncertain whether Alexander assigned the Jews any special 

privileges in the great city which he founded in Egypt ^ but there 

can be no doubt that the early Ptolemies highly favoured this 

class of their subjects, attracting them in vast numbers to their 

capital, encouraging their literature, and granting them many 

privileges. The subjection of Judsea to Egypt lasted from b.c. 320 

to B.C. 203; and though the country was during this space ravaged 

more than once by the forces of contending armies, yet on the 

whole the time must be regarded as one of general peace and 

prosperity. The High Priests continued to be at the head of the 

state, and ruled Judaea without much oppressive interference from 

the Egyptians. 

The High Priests during this period were — 1. Onias I, the son of Jaddua, 
about B.C. 330 to 300. 2. Simon the Just, the son of Onias, about B.C. 300 
to 290. 3. Eleazar, brother of Simon the Just, about B.C. 290 to 265. 
4. Manasseh, also a brother of Simon, about B.C. 265 to 240. 5. Onias II, son 
of Simon, B.C. 240 to 226. Nearly brought about a rupture with Egypt from 
his refusal to pay the customary tribute. 6. Simon II, son of Onias II, 
B.C. 226 to 198. 

9. Towards the close of the Ptolemaic period, the Jews began to 

have serious cause of complaint against their Egyptian rulers. The 

fourth Ptolemy (Philopator), a weak and debauched 

prince, attempted to violate the sanctity of the Jewish voluntarily 

Temple by entering it, and, when his attempt was P^^'^^^ herself 

frustrated, sought to revenge himself by punishing Seleucidse, 

the Alexandrian Jews, who had done him no injury ^''^' °^" 

at all. It was the natural result of these violent proceedings that 

the Jews, in disgust and alarm, should seek a protector elsewhere. 

Accordingly, when Antiochus the Great, in the infancy of Ptolemy 

Epiphanes, determined to attack Egypt, and to annex, if possible, to 

his own dominions the valuable maritime tract extending from his 

province of Upper Syria to the Sinaitic Desert, the Jews voluntarily 



314 LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

joined himi and though Ptolemy's general^ Scopas, recovered most 
of what had been lost, yet Antiochus, by the victory of Paneas, 
B.C. 198, was left in final possession of the whole region, which 
thenceforth, though often disputed by Egypt, became a possession 
of the Syrian kings. 

TO. Under Antiochus the Great, and for a time under his elder 
son, Seleucus Philopator, the Jews had no reason to repent the ex- 
change they had made. Both Antiochus, and Seleucus 
^if the Jews* for a while, respected the privileges of the nation, 
by the ^^d abstained from any proceedings that could give 
leadrto umbrage to their new subjects. But towards the 
'^^^les ^^°^^ °^ ^^^ reign of Seleucus, an important change 
of policy took place. The wealth of the Jewish Temple 
being reported to the Syrian monarch, and his own needs being great, 
he made an attempt to appropriate the sacred treasure, which was 
however frustrated, either by miracle, or by the contrivance of the 
High Priest, Onias. This unwarrantable' attempt of Seleucus was 
followed by worse outrages in the reign of his brother and successor, 
Antiochus Epiphanes. Not only did that monarch sell the office 
of High Priest, first to Jason and then to Menelaiis, but he en- 
deavoured to effect by systematic proceedings the complete Hellen- 
isation of the Jews, whereto a party in the nation was already 
sufficiently inclined. Further, having, by his own iniquitous pro- 
ceedings in the matter of the High Priesthood, given occasion to 
a civil war between the rival claimants, he chose to regard the 
war as rebellion against his authority, and on his return from his 
second Egyptian campaign, e.g. 170, took possession of Jerusalem, 
and gave it up to massacre and pillage. At the same time he 
plundered the Temple of its sacred vessels and treasures. Nor 
was this all. Two years afterwards, b. c. 168, he caused Jerusalem 
to be occupied a second time by an armed force, set up an idol 
altar in the Temple, and caused sacrifice to be offered there to 
Jupiter Olympius. The Jews were forbidden any longer to observe 
the Law, and were to be Hellenised by main force. Hence the 
rising under the Maccabees, and the gradual re-establishment of 
independence. 

High Priests xinder the Syrians: — 1. Onias III, son of Simon II, 
B.C. 198 to 175. Frustrates the attempt made to plunder the Temple by 
Heliodorus at the command of Seleucus Philopator. Deprived of the priest- 
hood by Antiochus Epiphanes at the instigation of Jason. 2. Jason, brother 
of Onias III, B.C. 175 to 172. Buys the office of Antiochus. Introduces 



PER. III. PART IV.] JUDjEA. 3Ig 

Greek customs. Sends an offering to Hercules at Tyre, Supplanted by his 
emissary, Menelaiis, 3, Menelaiis (according to Josephus, brother of Jason), 
B.C. 172 to 163. Buys the office. Civil war between him and Jason. Put to 
death'by Antiochus Eupator. 

II. Third Period. At first the patriots who rose up against the 
attempt to annihilate the national religion and life were a scanty 
band, maintaining themselves with difficulty in the 
mountains against the forces of the Syrian kings, the^iv^^ccabers, 
Jerusalem, which was won by Judas Maccabaeus, was '^- ^* 

lost again at his death j and it was not till about 
B.C. 153^ fourteen years after the first revolt, that the struggle 
entered on a new phase in consequence of the contentions which 
then began between different pretenders to the Syrian throne. 
When war arose between Demetrius and Alexander Balas, the 
support of the Jews was felt to be of importance by both 
parties. Both, consequently, made overtures to Jonathan, the third 
Maccabee prince, who was shortly recognised not only as Prince 
but also as High Priest of the nation. From this time, as there 
were almost constant disputes between rival claimants of the 
crown in Syria, the Jews were able to maintain themselves with 
comparative ease. Once or twice, during a pause in the Syrian 
contest, they were attacked and were forced to make a temporary 
submission. But the general result was that they maintained, and 
indeed continually enlarged, their independence. For some time 
they did not object to acknowledge the Syrian monarch as their 
suzerain, and to pay him an annual tribute ^ but after the death of 
Antiochus VII (Sidetes) all such payments seem to have ceased, 
and the complete independence of the country was established. 
Coins were struck bearing the name of the Maccabee prince, and 
the title of ' King.' Judsea was indeed from this time as powerful 
a monarchy as Syria. John Hyrcanus conquered Samaria and 
Idumsea, and thus largely extended the Jewish boundaries, exactly 
at the time when those of Syria were undergoing rapid contraction. 
(See above, p. 229.) 

12. The deliverance of the state from any further fear of sub- 
jection by Syria was followed almost immediately by internal 
quarrels and dissensions, which led naturally to the commence- 
acceptance of a position of subordination under ment of 
another power. The Pharisees and Sadducees, ^^ Rome? 
hitherto mere religious sects, became transformed ^- °- ^^• 
into political factions. Civil wars broke out. The members of 



3i6 LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

the royal family quarrelled among each other, and the different 

pretenders to the crown appealed for assistance to foreign nations. 

About B. c. 6'^ the Romans entered upon the scene • and for the 

last twenty-six years of the Maccabee period — b. c. 6^ to 37 — 

while feeble princes of the once mighty Asmonaean family still 

nominally held the throne, the Great Republic was really supreme 

in Palestine, took tribute, and appointed governors, or sanctioned 

the rule of kings, at her pleasure. It is the change of dynasty, and 

not any change in the internal condition of the country, that causes 

the year b. c. 37 to be taken as that at which to draw the line 

between the close of one period and the commencement of another. 

List of the Asmonsean Princes : — 1. Mattathias, a priest, leader of the 
revolt, B.C. 168 to 167. 2. Judas Maccabseus, his third son. After some small 
successes, defeats Apollonius at Bethhoron, B.C. 167. Gains a victory at 
Emmaus over the forces of Lysias, B.C. 166, and defeats Lysias himself at 
Bethsura, B.C. 165, Occupies all Jerusalem except the citadel, and purifies 
the Temple. Jerusalem besieged by Lysias, B.C. 163. Expedition of Nicanor, 
B.C. 161. Judas defeats him at Capharsalama and at Adasa, Invasion of 
Bacchides. Judas is defeated and falls at Eleasa, ' the Jewish Thermopylae.' 
Jerusalem recovered by the Syrians. 3. Jonathan, a younger brother of 
Judas, maintains the war for eight years with fair success in the mountains 
north-east of Jerusalem, inflicting several defeats upon Bacchides. The 
invasion of Syria by Alexander Balas, B.C. 153, entirely changes his position. 
Both parties court him. Demetrius puts him in possession of Jerusalem, 
Alexander nominates him to the High-Priesthood, and obtains his assistance 
in the war which follows. At his death, B.C. 146, Demetrius II makes terms 
with the Jews, but fails to fulfil them, in consequence of which Jonathan joins 
the party of Antiochus VI, the son of Alexander Balas, and lends it efficient 
aid, till his murder by the conspirator Tryphon, B.C. 144. 4, Simon, the last 
remaining son of Mattathias, succeeded his brother Jonathan, and to avenge 
his death made common cause with Demetrius II against Tryphon, B.C. 143, 
stipulating, however, at the same time for the complete independence of his 
country. The first Jewish coins are now struck. The Syrian garrison is 
expelled from the citadel of Jerusalem. Simon is practically king of the Jews. 
At the same time he holds the High-Priesthood. The Jews continue undis- 
turbed and prosperous for some years; and when, in B.C. 138, Antiochus 
Sidetes, having reduced Tryphon to extremities, resolves to make an attempt 
to reconquer the country, his general, Cendebseus, is defeated, and Simon 
once more triumphs. Soon afterwards, however, B.C. 135, he is assassinated by 
his own son-in-law, Ptolemseus, who attempts to seize the kingdom. 5. John 
Hyrcanus, son of Simon, obtains the government ; but before he is well settled 
in his kingdom, Sidetes renews his enterprise, and after a war which lasts two 
years, B.C. 135 to 133, he forces Hyrcanus to acknowledge his authority, to 
dismantle Jerusalem, and to renew the payment of tribute. But on the death 
of Sidetes in the Parthian War, B.C. 129, Hyrcanus throws of the yoke, and takes 
advantage of the troubles which break out anew in Syria to enlarge his domi- 
nions by the conquest of Idumsea and Samaria, B.C. 109. From this time 
the authority of Syria is at an end, John Hyrcanus dies in peace, B,c, 106, 
leaving the government to his eldest son, Aristobulus. 6. Aristobulus reigns 
one year only, during which he shows a cruel disposition. He is succeeded by 
his brother, 7, Alexander Jannseus, who reigns from B.C. 105 to 78. In this 
reign the quarrels between the Pharisees and Sadducees come to a head and 
disturb the peace of the country. Alexander is a Sadducee ; and the 



PER. III. PAET IV.] JUDMA. 317 

Pharisees, having induced the people to insult him, a war breaks out, which 
rages for six years (b.c. 95 to 89), Jannaeus, being finally the victor. An 
attempt is subsequently made to dethrone him by the aid of Demetrius 
Eucserus of Syria. (See above, p. 230.) Success again rests with Jannaeus, 
who once more severely punishes his adversaries. After this he reigns for some 
years peacefully, and is allowed to leave his crovra to his widow, 8. Alex- 
andra, who joins the party of the Pharisees, and is maintained on the throne 
by their influence. At her death, in B.C. 70, her two sons, 8. Hyrcanus, the 
High Priest, and 10. Aristobulus, quarrelled for the possession of the throne, 
and engaged in a civil war, which lasted till Pompey, in B.C. 63, took Jeru- 
salem, carried off Aristobulus, and established Hyrcanus, who then reigned 
quietly from B.C. 63 to 57. In B.C. 57, Aristobulus, having escaped from 
Roriie, raised fresh troubles, which were quelled by the Roman commander, 
Gabinius, who deposed Hyrcanus, and established a species of oligarchy, which 
lasted ten years, B.C. 57 to 47. Hyrcanus was then restored to power by 
Julius Caesar, whom he had aided in the Egyptian campaign of B.C. 48, and 
remained at the head of affairs till B.C. 40, when he was deposed and muti- 
lated by the last Asmonaean prince, 11. Antigonus, who, having obtained 
a Parthian force, took Jerusalem, and held the government for three years, 
B.C. 40 to 37, when he was forced to yield to Herod, assisted by the Romans. 

13. Fourth Period. During the fourth period Roman influence 
waSj not only practically, as during much of the third period, but 
professedly predominant over the country. The 

Herods, who owed their establishment in authority the^erods,^ 

wholly to the Romans, had no other means of b.c. 37 to 
• • . , , , , . , A. D. 44. 

maintaining themselves than by preserving the 

favour of their patrons. Obnoxious, except to a small fraction 
of the nation, from their Idum^an descent, they were hated still 
more as the minions of a foreign power, a standing proof to the 
nation of its own weakness and degraded condition. On the 
other hand, there were no doubt some who viewed the rule of the 
Herods as^ in a certain sense, a protection against Rome, a some- 
thing interposed between the nation and its purely heathen 
oppressors, saving the national life from extinction, and offering 
the best compromise, which circumstances permitted, between 
an impossible entire independence and a too probable absorption 
into the empire. Such persons were willing to see in Herod the 
Great, and again in Herod Agrippa, the Messiah — the king 
foredoomed to save them from the yoke of the foreigner, and to 
obtain for them the respect, if not even the obedience, of the 
surrounding peoples. 

14. But these feelings, and the attachment to the dynasty which 
grew out of them, must have become weaker as Period of 
time went on. The kingdom of the Herods croaXments 
gradually lost instead of gaining in power. Rome a.d. 8-44. 
continually encroached more and more. As early as a.d. 8, a 



3i8 LESSER KINGDOMS. [book iv. 

portion of Palestine, and the most important portion in the 
eyes of the Jews, was formally incorporated into the Roman 
empire ; and though the caprice of an emperor afterwards revoked 
this proceeding, and restored another Herod to the throne of his 
grandfather, yet from the moment when the first Procurator levied 
taxes in a Jewish province all but the wilfully blind must have 
seen what was impending. The civil authority of the last native 
prince over Judaea came to an end in a.d. 44; and the whole of 
Palestine, except a small district held as a kingdom by Agrippa II, 
was from that time absorbed into the empire, being appended to 
the Roman province of Syria and ruled wholly by Roman Pro- 
curators. The national life was consequently at the last gasp. 
As far as political forms went, it was extinct ; but there remained 
enough of vital energy in the seeming corpse for the nation 
once more to reassert itself, and to show by the great ' War of 
Independence' that it was not to be finally crushed without a 
fearful struggle, the issue of which at one time appeared almost 
doubtful. 

Line of Jewish Governors from B.C. 37 to a.d. 44: — 1. Herod the 
Great. Obtains his crown by the favour of Antony, B.C. 37. Marries 
Mariamne, the Asmonaean princess, the same year. His dominions increased 
by Augustus, after Actium, B.C. 30. Rebuilds the Temple with great 
magnificence, but also rebuilds that on Mount Gerizim, and at Csesarea erects 
heathen temples. Maintains a body-guard of foreign mercenaries. Cruel 
and suspicious, especially towards the members of his own family. Puts to 
death Mariamne, her grandfather Hyrcanus, her two sons Aristobulus and 
Alexander, Antipater, his eldest son, and others. Dies B.C. 4 (according to 
the received chronology). 2. Archelaiis, 3. Antipas, and 4. Philip, inherit 
portions of their father's dominions, Archelaiis having Idumaea, Judaea and 
Samaria ; Antipas, Galilee and Peraea ; and Philip, Ituraea and Trachonitis. 
Archelaiis rules oppressively, and is deposed by the Romans, a.d. 8, who add 
his dominions to the province of Syria, but assign the actual government to 
Procurators. These were 5. Coponius ; 6. M. Ambivius ; 7. Annius Rufus ; 
8. Valerius Gratus, A.D. 14 to 25; 9. Pontius Pilate, a.d. 25 to 36; 
10. Marcellus. Antipas ruled in Galilee from B.C. 4 to A.D. 39, when he was 
deposed; and Philip in Trachonitis, from B.C. 4 to a.d. 37, when he died. 
As these principalities became vacant they were conferred by the favour of 
Caligula on 11. Herod Agrippa I, the son of Aristobulus, who in a.d. 41 re- 
ceived from Claudius the further addition to his kingdom of Samaria and Judasa, 
and thus united under his sway all Palestine. He died, after commencing 
a persecution of the Christians, a.d. 44; whereupon the Romans placed 
Palestine once more under the government of Procurators. Those of Judsea 
were 12. Caspius Fadus, A.D. 44 to 48; 13. Ventidius Cumanus, a.d. 48 
to 49; 14. Antonius Felix, a.d. 49 to 55; 15. Porcius Festus, a.d. 55 to 
59; 16. Albinus, a.d. 62 to 65 ; and 17. Gessius Floras, under whom the 
Jews broke out into open rebellion. Parallel with this later line of Pro- 
curators was the government of 17. Herod Agrippa H, first in Chalcis, and 
then in Abilen6 and Trachonitis, from A. D. 50 to 70, when his principality 
was swallowed up in the new arrangements consequent upon the revolt of the 



PER. III. PART IV.] JUD^A. 319 

Jews and their reduction. Agrippa assisted the Romans in the Jewish War ; 
and at its close retired to Rome, where he lived till the third year of Trajan, 
A. D, 100. 

15. The proximate cause of the great Jewish revolt and of the 

'War of Independence' M^as the oppression of the Procurators, 

and especially of Gessius Florus. But, even had the Tyranny of the 

Roman governors ruled mildly, it is probable that Procurators, 

a rebellion would sooner or later have broken out. 44I66. 

The Roman system was unlike those of the foreign Revolts pxit 

powers to which Judaea had in former times sub- Destmction 

mitted. It was intolerant of differences, and aimed Jerusalem 

everywhere, not only at absorbing, but at assimi- ^.c. 70. 

lating the populations. The Jews could under no circumstances 

have allowed their nationality to be crushed otherwise than by 

violence. As it was, the tyranny of Gessius Florus precipitated 

a struggle which must have come in any case, and made the 

contest fiercer, bloodier, and more protracted than it might have 

been otherwise. From the first revolt against his authority to the 

capture of the city by Titus was a period of nearly five years, 

B.C. 66 to 70. The fall of the city was followed by its destruction, 

partly as a punishment for the desperation of the resistance, but 

more as a precaution to deprive the Jews, now felt to be really 

formidable, of their natural rallying-point in any future rebellion. 

Works upon the history of the Jews are numerous, and many of them are 
extremely valuable. The more important have been already noticed. (See 
above, p. 44.) But the following also deserve attention : — 

Basnage, Histoire des Juifs depuis Jesus Christ jusqu'a present. La Haye, 
1716 ; 15 vols. i2mo. Parts i. and ii. belong to this period. 

PridEAUX, T^he Old and Neiv Testament connected in the History of the 
Jeius and Neighbouring Nations. London, 17 14; 2 vols. 8vo. Much of this 
treatise is now antiquated ; but it has not been wholly superseded by any 
later English work on the subject. 

JOST, J. M., Geschichte der Israeliten seit der Zeit der Makkab'der bis aufunsere 
Tage. Berlin, 1828-47 ! 10 vols. 8vo. 

Herzfeld, C, Geschichte des Folkes Israel 'von Vollendung des znveiten Tempel 
bis zur Entsetzung des Makabders Schimon zum hohen Priester. Leipzig, 1863 ; 
2 vols. 8vo. 

An excellent sketch of the history is also contained in the valuable work of 

DOLLINGER, J. J. T., Der Heide und der Jude. Miinchen, 1857. An 

authorised translation of this work has been published under the title of The 

Gentile and the Je^v in the Courts of the Temple of Christ. From the German by 

N. Darnell. London, 1862 ; 2 vols. 8vo. 



BOOK V. 



HISTORY OF ROME FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES TO THE 
FALL OF THE WESTERN EMPIRE, A.D. 476, AND PARALLEL 
HISTORY OF PARTHIA. 

PART I. HISTORY OF ROME. 

Preliminary Remarks on the Geography of Ancient Italy. 

I. The Italian Peninsula is the smallest of the three tracts 
which project themselves from the European continent southwards 

Italy— size into the Mediterranean. Its greatest length between 
and boundaries. ^]^g ^jpg ^^^ Cape Spartivento is 730 miles, and its 
greatest width between the Little St. Bernard and the hills north 
of Trieste is 330 miles. The ordinary width, however, is only 
100 miles J and the area is thus, even including the littoral 
islands, not much more than 110,000 square miles. The pe- 
ninsula was bounded on the north and north-west by the Alps, 
on the east by the Adriatic, on the south by the Mediterranean, 
and on the west by the Tyrrhenian Sea {Mare Tyrrhenum). 

3. The littoral extent of Italy is, in proportion to its area, 

very considerable, chiefly owing to the length and narrowness 

Extent of the of the peninsula j for the main coasts are but very 

sea-board, slightly indented. Towards the west a moderate 
number of shallow gulfs, or rather bays, give a certain variety to 
the coast-line j while on the east there is but one important head- 
land, that of Gargano; and but one bay of any size, that of 
Manfredonia. Southwards, however, the shore has two con- 
siderable indentations in what would otherwise be but a short line. 



PARTI.] GEOGRAPHICAL OUTLINE. 321 

viz. the deep Gulf of Taranto and the shallower one of Squillace. 
A character generally similar attaches to the coasts of the Italian 
islands, Sardinia, Sicily, and Corsica ; and hence, though a nautical 
tendency belongs naturally to the Italian people, the tendency 
is not so distinct and pronounced as in the neighbouring country 
of Greece. 

3. The Mountains of Italy consist of the two famous chains 
of the Alps and the Apennines, {a) The Alps, which bound Italy 
along the whole of its northern and a part of its „, 

'-' ^ ine mountain 

western side, form a lofty barrier naturally isolating system, 
the region from the rest of Europe. Nowhere less ^ ^^^' 

along the entire boundary-line than 4000 feet in height, and 
varying from that minimum to a maximum of 15,000 feet, they 
are penetrable by no more than ten or twelve difficult passes, even 
at the present day. Their general direction is from east to west, 
or, speaking more strictly, from N. E. E. to S.W.W. ^ but, at 
a certain point in their course, the point in which they culminate, 
this direction ceases, and they suddenly change their course and 
run nearly due north and south. Mont Blanc stands at the corner 
thus formed, like a gigantic buttress at the angle of a mighty 
building. The length of the chain from Mont Blanc southwards 
to the coast is about 1 50 miles ; the length eastward, so far as the 
Alps are Italian, is about 330 miles. Thus this huge barrier 
guards Italy for a distance of 480 miles with a rampart which in 
ancient time could scarcely be scaled, [h) From the point where 
the Alps, striking southward from Mont Blanc, reach most nearly 
to the sea, a secondary chain is thrown off, which -pj^^ 

runs at first from west to east, almost parallel with Apennines. 
the shore, to about the longitude of Cremona (10° East from 
Greenwich, nearly), after which it begins to trend south of east, 
and passing in this direction across about three-fourths of the 
peninsula, it again turns still more to the south, and proceeds in 
a course which is, as nearly as possible_, due south-east, parallel to 
the two coasts of the peninsula, along its entire length. This 
chain is properly the Apennines. In modern geography its more 
western portion bears the name of 'The Maritime Alps;' but as 
the chain is really continuous from a point a little north-east 
of Nice to the neighbourhood of Reggio (Rhegium), a single name 
should be given to it throughout ; and, for distinction's sake, that 
name should certainly not be 'Alps' but 'Apennines.' The 

Y 



322 ROME. [book v. 

Apennines in Northern Italy consist of but a single chain, which 
throws ofF twisted spurs to the right hand and to the left j but, when 
Central Italy is reached, the character of the range becomes more 
complicated. Below Lake Fucinus the chain bifurcates. While 
one range, the stronger of the two, pursues the old south-easterly 
direction^ another of minor elevation branches off to the south, 
and approaching the south coast very closely in the vicinity of 
Salernum, curves round and rejoins the main chain near Compsa. 
The range then proceeds in a single line nearly to Venusia, when 
it splits once more ^ and while one branch runs on nearly due east 
to the extreme promontory of lapygia, the other proceeds almost 
due south to Rhegium. 

4. The most marked feature of Italian geography is the strong 
contrast in which Northern stands to Southern Italy. Northern 
Contrast be- Italy is almost all plain ; Southern almost all moun- 
tween North- tain. The conformation of the mountain ranges 
Southern in the north leaves betwe;en the parallel chains of 
Italy. the Swiss Alps and the Upper Apennines a vast 
tract — from 100 to 150 miles in width, which (speaking broadly) 
may be called a single plain — ' the Plain of the Po,' or ' the Plain 
of Lombardo-Venetia.' In Southern Italy, or the Peninsula proper, 
plains of more than a few miles in extent are rare. The Apen- 
nines, with their many twisted spurs, spread broadly over the 
land, and form a continuous mountain region which occupies at 
least one half of the surface. But this is not all. Where the 
chain is sufficiently narrow to allow of the interposition, between 
its base and the shore, of any tolerably wide tract — as in Etruria, 
in Latium, and in Campania — separate systems of hills and 
mountains, volcanic in character, exist, and prevent the occurrence 
of any really extensive levels. The only exception to this general 
rule is in Apulia, where an extensive tract of plain is found about 
the Candelaro, Cervaro, and Ofanto rivers. 

5. The Rivers of Italy are exceedingly numerous ; but only one 

or two are of any considerable size. The great river is the Po 

(Padus), which, rising at the foot of Monte Viso, in 

The rivers. ^ n ^ o ' 

Lat. 44° 40', Long. 7", nearly, drains almost the 
whole of the great northern plain, receiving above a hundred tri- 
butaries, and having a course v/hich, counting only main windings, 
probably exceeds 400 miles. The chief of its tributaries are the 
Duria (Dora Baltea), the Ticinus (Ticino), the Addua (Adda), the 



PART I.] GEOGRAPHICAL OUTLINE. 323 

Ollius (Oglio), and the Mincius (Mincio), from the north • from the 
south, the Tanarus (Tanaro), the Trebia (Trebbia), the Tarus 
(Taro), the Secia (Secchia), the Scultenna (Panaro), and the Rhenus 
(Reno). The next most important of the Italian rivers is the 
Athesis, or Adige, which, rising in the Tyrolean Alps^ flows south- 
wards nearly to Verona j after which, curving round, it runs 
parallel with the Po into the Adriatic. Both these rivers are 
beyond the limits of the Peninsula proper. Within those limits 
the chief streams are the Arnus, Tiber, Liris, Vulturnus, and 
Silarus on the western side of the Apennines ; the yEsis, Aternus, 
Tifernus, Frento, Cerbalus, and Aufidus to the east of those 
mountains. 

6. Italy possesses a fair number of Lakes. Most of these lie 
towards the north, on the skirts of the Alps, at the point where 
the mountains sink down into the plain. The chief 

The lakes. 

are the Benacus (Lago di Garda)^ between Lombardy 
and Venetia, the Sevinus (Lago d" Iseo), the Larius (Lago di 
Como)j the Ceresius (Lago di Lugano), the Verbanus (Lago 
Maggiore), and the Lago d' Orta, which is unnoticed by the 
ancients. There is one important lake, the Lacus Fucinus, in 
the Central Apennine region. In Etruria are the Trasimenus 
(Lago di Perugia), the Volsiniensis (Lago di Bolsena), and the 
Sabatinus (Lago di Bracciano). Besides these, there are numerous 
lagoons on the sea-coast, especially in the neighbourhood of 
Venice, and several mountain tarns of small size, but of great 
beauty. 

7. The Italian Islands are, from their size, their fertility, and 
their mineral treasures, peculiarly important. They constitute 
nearly one-fourth of the whole area of the country. 

^ . . , . 1-1 1 ■ t 1 ■ 1 The islands. 

Sicily is exceedingly productive both in corn and 
in wine of an excellent quality. Sardinia and Corsica are rich 
in minerals. Even the little island of Elba (Ilva) is valuable for 
its iron. Sicily and the Lipari isles yield abundance of sulphur. 

8. The only Nattiral Division of Italy is into Northern and 
Southern — the former comprising the plain of the Po and the 
mountains inclosing it, so far as they are Italian ; chief 

the latter coextensive with the Peninsula proper. divisions. 
It is usual, however, to divide the peninsula itself artificially into 
two portions by a line drawn across it from the mouth of the 
Silarus to that of the Tifernus. In this way a triple division 



324 ROME. [book v. 

of Italy is produced : and the three parts are then called Northern, 
Central, and Southern. It will be convenient to enumerate the 
countries into which Italy was anciently parcelled out under the 
three heads furnished by this latter division. 

9. Northern Italy contained^ in the most ancient times to 
which history goes back, the three countries of Liguria, Upper 

Northern Etruria, and Venetia. After a while, part of Liguria 
Italy. and almost the whole of Upper Etruria were occu- 
pied by Gallic immigrants ; and, the boundary-lines being to some 
extent changed, there still remained in this large and important 
tract three countries only, viz. Liguria, Venetia, and Gallia 
Cisalpina j the last-named having, as it were, taken the place of 
Upper Etruria. 

10. Liguria was the tract at the extreme west of Northern 
Italy. Before the Gallic invasion it probably reached to the 

Pennine and Graian Alps ; but in later times it was 
regarded as bounded on the: north by the Po, on the 
west by the Alps from Monte Viso (Vesulus) southwards, on the 
south by the Mediterranean, and on the east by the river Macra. 
It was a country almost entirely mountainous ; for spurs from the 
Alps and Apennines occupy the whole tract between the mountain- 
ranges and the river Po, as far down as Long. 9°. Liguria derived 
its name from its inhabitants, the Ligures or Ligyes, a race who 
once occupied the entire coast from below the mouth of the Arno 
to Massilia. Its chief towns were Genua (Genoa), Nicaea (Nice), 
and Asta (Asti). 

11. Venetia was at the opposite side, or extreme east, of North 
Italy. It is difficult to say what were its original or natural limits. 

From the earliest times of which we have any know- 
ledge, the Veneti were always encroached upon, first 
by the Etruscans and then by the Gauls, until a mere corner of 
North Italy still remained in their possession. This corner lay 
between Histria on the one side, and the Lesser Meduacus upon 
the other ; southwards it extended to the Adriatic Sea, northwards 
to the flanks of the Alps. It was a tract of country for the most 
part exceedingly flat, well watered by streams flowing from the 
Alps, and fertile. The chief city in ancient times was Patavium, 
on the Lesser Meduacus j but this place was afterwards eclipsed by 
Aquileia. 

12. The Etruscan state, which the Gauls conquered, was a con- 



PARTI.] GEOGRAPHICAL OUTLINE. 325 

federacy of twelve cities, whose territory reached from the Ticinus 
on the west to the Adriatic and the mouths of the GalHa 
Po upon the east. Among its cities were Melpum, Cisalpina. 
Mediolanum (Milan), Mantua^ Verona, Hatria, and Felsina or 
Bononia. Northward it was bounded by the Alps, southward by 
the Apennines and the course of the Utis, or perhaps by that 
of the Rubicon. When the Gauls made their conquests they 
overstepped these boundaries, taking from the Ligurians all their 
territory north of the Padus, and perhaps some to the south, about 
Placentia and Parma, encroaching on the Veneti towards the east, 
and southwards advancing into Umbria. Thus Gallia Cisalpina 
had larger limits than had belonged to North Etruria. It was 
bounded on the north and west by the Alps ; on the south by 
Liguria, the main chain of the Apennines^ and the tEsIs river; on 
the east by the Adriatic and Venetia. The whole tract, except in 
some swampy districts, was richly fertile. While it remained Gallic, 
it was almost without cities. The Gauls lived, themselves, in open 
unwalled villages, and suffered most of the Etruscan towns to fall 
to decay. Some, as Melpum, disappeared. A few maintained 
themselves as Etruscan, in a state of semi-independence ; e. g. 
Mantua and Verona. In Roman times, however, the country 
was occupied by a number of most important cities, chiefly Roman 
colonies. Among these were, in the region south of the Po, 
Placentia, Parma, Mutina (now Modena), Bononia (now Bologna), 
Ravenna, and Ariminium (now Rimini) ; and across the river 
to the north of it, Augusta Taurinorum (Turin), Ticinum (Pavia), 
Mediolanum (Milan), Brixia (Brescia), Cremona, Mantua, Verona, 
and Vincentia (now Vicenza.) 

] 3. Central Italy, or the upper portion of the Peninsula proper, 
comprised six countries — Etruria, Latium, and Campania towards 
the west; Umbria, Picenum, and the Sabine terri- central 
tory (which had no general name) towards the east. Italy. 
These countries included the three most important in Italy, 
viz. Latium_, Etruria^ and the territory of the Sabines. 

14. Etruria, or Tyrrhenia (as it was called by the Greeks), was 
the tract immediately south and west of the northern Apennines, 
interposed between that chain and the Mediterra- 
nean. It was bounded on the north by Liguria and 
Gallia Cisalpina; on the east by Umbria and the old Sabine 
country ; on the west by the Mediterranean Sea ; and on the south 



326 ROME. [BOOK V. 

by Latium. The line of separation between it and the rest of the 
continent was very marked, being first the strong chain of the 
Apennines and then, almost from its source, the river Tiber. 
Etruria was watered by two main streams, the Arnus (Arno), and 
the Clanis (Chiana), a tributary of the Tiber. It was for the most 
part mountainous^ consisting in its northern and eastern portions 
of strong spurs thrown off from the Apennines, and in its southern 
and western, of a separate system of rocky hills, ramifying 
irregularly, and reaching from the valleys of the Arnus and Clanis 
very nearly to the coast. The little level land which it contained 
was along the courses of the rivers and near the sea-shore. The 
soil was generally rich, but in places marshy. The country con- 
tained three important lakes. (See above, § 6.) The original 
Etrurian state consisted of a confederacy of twelve cities^ among 
which were certainly Volsinii^ Tarquinii, Vetulonium, Perusia, 
and Clusium ; and probably Volaterrse, Arretium, Rusellse, Veii, 
and Agylla or Csere. Other important towns were Pisae (Pisa), 
and Fsesul^ (Fiesole), north of the Arnus; Populonia and Cosa, on 
the coast between the Arnus and the Tiber; Cortona in the 
Clanis valley ; and Falerii near the Tiber, about eighteen miles 
north of Veii. 

i^. Latium lay below Etruria, on the left bank of the Tiber. 
It was bounded on the north by the Tiber, the Anio, and the 
Upper Liris rivers; on the west and south by the 
Mediterranean ; on the east by the Lower Liris and 
a spur of the Apennines. These, however, were not its original 
limits, but those whereto it ultimately attained. Anciently many 
non-Latin tribes inhabited portions of the territory. The Volsci 
held the isolated range of hills reaching from near Prseneste to the 
coast at Tarracina or Anxur. The yEqui were in possession of 
the Mons Algidus, and of the mountain-range between Praeneste 
and the Anio. The Hernici were located in the valley of the 
Trerus, a tributary of the Liris. On the Lower Liris were estab- 
lished the Ausones. The nation of the Latins formed, we are 
told, a confederacy of thirty cities, Alba having originally the 
pre-eminency. Among the thirty the most important were the 
following: — Tibur, Gabii, Praeneste, Tusculum, Velitras, Aricia, 
Lanuvium, Laurentum, Lavinium, Ardea^ Antium, Circeii, Anxur 
or Tarracina, Setia, Norba, and Satricum. Latium was chiefly 
a low plain, but diversified towards the north by spurs from the 



PAETi.] GEOGRAPHICAL OUTLINE. 327 

Apennines, in the centre and towards the south by two important 
ranges of hills. One of these, known as 'the Volscian range/ 
extends in a continuous line from near Prseneste to Tarracina; 
the other, which is quite separate and detached, rises out of the 
plain between the Volscian range and the Tiber^ and is known as 
'the Alban range,' or the 'Mons Algidus/ Both are in the 
western part of the country. The eastern is comparatively a flat 
region. Here were Anagnia, the old capital of the Hernici, 
Arpinum, Fregel!«, Aquinum, Interamna ad Lirim ; and, on the 
coast, Lantulse, Fundi^ Formiae, Minturnse, and Vescia. 

16. Campania in its general character very much resembled 
Latium^ but the isolated volcanic hills which here diversified the 
plain were loftier and placed nearer the coast. To 

the extreme south of the country a strong spur ran ampama. 
out from the Apennines terminating in the promontory of Minerva, 
the southern protection of the Bay of Naples. Campania ex- 
tended along the coast from the Liris to the Silarus, and reached 
inland to the more southern of the two Apennine ranges, which, 
separating a little below Lake Fucinus, reunite at Compsa. The 
plain country was all rich, especially that about Capua. Among 
the principal Campanian towns were Capua, the capital, Nola 
and Teanum in the interior, and upon the coast Sinuessa, 
Cumse, Puteoli, Parthenope or Neapolis, Herculaneum, Pompeii, 
Surrentum, Salernum, and Picentia. 

17. Umbria lay east of Etruria, from which it was separated, 
first by the range of the Apennines, and then by the river Tiber. 
It was bounded on the north by Gallia Cisalpina- 

on the east and south-east by Picenum and the 
Sabine country; on the south-west and west by Etruria. Before 
the invasion of the Gauls it reached as far north as the Rubicon, 
and included all the Adriatic coast between that stream and the 
Msvs, ; but after the coming of the Senones this tract was lost, and 
Umbria was shut out from the sea. The Umbrian territory was 
almost wholly mountainous, consisting, as it did, chiefly of the 
main chain of the Apennines, together with the spurs on either 
side of the chain, from the source of the Tiber to the junction 
with the Tiber of the Nar. Some rich plains, however, occurred 
in the Tiber and Lower Nar valleys. The chief towns of Umbria 
were Iguvium, famous for its inscriptions; Sentinum, the scene 
of the great battle with the Gauls and Samnites; Spoletium (now 



328 ROME. [bookv. 

Spoleto) • Interamna (now Terni) ; and Narnia (Narni), which, 
though on the left bank of the Nar, was still reckoned to 
Umbria. 

1 8. Picenum extended along the coast of the Adriatic from the 

^Esis to the Matrinus (Piomba) river. It was composed mainly 

of spurs from the Apennines, but contained along 

Picenum. '- ,^., rT-,i i-r 

the coast some flat and fertile country. The chief 

towns were Ancona, on the coast, Firmum (Fermo), Asculum 

Picenum (Ascoli), and Hadria (Atri), in the interior. 

19. The territory of the Sabine races, in which Picenum ought 
perhaps to be included^ was at once the most extensive and the 

The Sabine most advantageously situated of all the countries of 
territory. Central Italy. In length, from the Mons Fiscellus 
(Monte Rotondo) to the Mons Vultur (Monte Vulture), it ex- 
ceeded 300 miles j while in breadth it reached very nearly from 
sea to sea, bordering the Adriatic from the Matrinus to the 
Tifernus rivers, and closely approaching the Mediterranean in 
the vicinity of Salernum. In the north it comprised all the 
valleys of the Upper Nar and its tributaries, together with 
a portion of the valley of the Tiber, the plain country south 
and east of Lake Fucinus, and the valleys of the Suimis and 
Aternus rivers. Its central mass was made up of the valleys 
of the Sagrus, Trinius, and Tifernus, together with the mountain- 
ranges between them ; while southward it comprised the whole 
of the great Samnite upland drained by the Vulturnus, and 
its tributaries. The territory had many distinct political divi- 
sions. The north-western tract, about the Nar and Tiber, 
reaching from the main chain of the Apennines to the Anio, was 
the country of the old Sabines (Sabini), the only race to which that 
name is applied by the ancient writers. East and south-east of 
this region, the tract about Lake Fucinus, and the valleys of the 
Suinus and Aternus rivers, were in the possession of the League 
of the Four Cantons, the, Marsi, Marrucini, Peligni, and Vestini, 
who probably were Sabine races. Still further to the east, the 
valleys of the Sagrus and Trinius, and the coast tract from Ortona 
to the Tifernus, formed the country of the Frentani. South and 
south-east of this was Samnium, comprising the high upland, the 
main chain of the Apennines, and the eastern flank of that 
chain for a certain distance. The chief of the Sabine towns 
were Reate on the Velinus, a tributary of the Nar • Teate 



PAKTi.] GEOGRAPHICAL OUTLINE. 329 

and Aternum on the Aternus , Marrubium on Lake Fucinus ; 
and Beneventum and Bovianum in Samnium. 

30. Southern Italy, or the tract below the Tifernus and 
Silarus rivers, contained four countries — on the west, Lucania 
and Bruttiumj on the east, Apulia and Messapia, Southern 
or, as it was sometimes called, lapygia. The Italy. 
entire number of distinct countries in ancient Italy was thus 
thirteen. 

21. Lucania extended along the west coast of Italy from the 
Silarus to the Laiis river. Its boundary on the north was formed 
by the Silarus, the chain of the Apennines from 

■' -' ^ Lucania. 

Compsa to the Mons Vultur, and the course of the 
Bradanus (Brandano). Eastward, its border was the shore of 
the Tarentine Gulf j southward, where it adjoined Bruttium, the 
line of demarcation ran from the Lower Laiis across the moun- 
tains to the Crathis, or river of Thurii. The country was both 
picturesque and fertile, diversified by numerous spurs from the 
Apennine range, and watered by a multitude of rivers. It had 
few native cities of any importance ; but the coasts were thickly 
occupied by Grecian settlements of great celebrity. Among these 
were, on the west coast, Posidonia or Paestum, £lea or Velia, 
Pyxus or Buxentum, and Laiis j on the east, Metapontum, Hera- 
cleia, Pandosia, Siris, Sybaris, and Thurii. (See above, pp. 

154-1570 

22. Bruttium adjoined Lucania on the south, and was a country 

very similar in character. Its chief native city was Consentia, in 
the interior, near the sources of the Crathis river. 

Bruttium. 

On the western coast were the Greek towns or 

Temesa, Terina, Hipponium, and Rhegium ^ on the eastern those 

of Croton, Caulonia, and Locri. 

23. Apulia lay entirely on the eastern coast, adjoining Samnium 
upon the west, and separated from the country of the Frentani by 
the Tifernus river. The range of the Apennines, 
extending from the Mons Vultur eastward as far as ^^ ^^' 
Long. 17° 40', divided it from lapygia. Apulia differed from all 
the other countries of the Peninsula proper in being almost wholly 
a plain. Except in the north-west corner of the province, no 
spurs of any importance here quit the Apennines, but from their 
base extends a vast and rich level tract, from twenty to forty miles 
wide, intersected by numerous streams, and diversified towards its 



330 ROME. ' [BOOK v. 

more eastern portion by a number of lakes. The tract is especi- 
ally adapted for the grazing of cattle. Among its rivers are the 
Aufidus, on the banks of which Cannae was fought, the Cerbalus, 
and the river of Arpi. The only mountainous part of Apulia is 
the north and north-west, where the Apennines send down to the 
coast two strongly-marked spurs, one between the Tifernus and 
the Frento rivers, the other, east of the Frento, a still stronger 
and more important range, which running towards the north-east 
reaches the coast, and forms the well-known rocky promontory of 
Garganum. The chief cities of Apulia were Larinum, near the 
Tifernus; Luceria, Sipontum, and Arpi, north of the Cerbalus; 
Salapia, between the Cerbalus and Aufidus ; and Canusium, Cannae, 
and Venusia, south of that river. It was usual to divide Apulia 
into two regions, of which the north-western was called Daunia, 
the south-eastern Peucetia. 

34. Messapia, or lapygia, lay south and east of Apulia, com- 
prising the entire long promontory which has been called the 

^ heel ' of Italy, and a triangular tract between the 

lapygia. ^ 

east Apennine range and the river Bradanus. To- 
wards the east it was low and flat, full of numerous small lakes, 
and without important rivers ; westward it was diversified by 
numerous ranges of hills, spurs from the Apulian Apennines, 
which sheltered it upon the north and rendered it one of the 
softest and most luxurious of the Italian countries. The most 
important of the lapygian cities was Taras, or Tarentum, the 
famous Lacedsemonian colony. (See above, p. 154.) Other Greek 
settlements were Callipolis (now Gallipoli), and Hydrus or 
Hydruntum (now Otranto). The chief native town was Brun- 
dusium. 

35. The geography of Italy is incomplete without a description 

of the principal islands. These were three in number, 
Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica. There were also nume- 
rous islets along the western and a few off the eastern coast, 
which will require a very brief notice. 

26. Sicily, which is estimated to contain about ten thousand 

square miles, is an irregular triangle, the sides of 

which face respectively the north, the east, and the 

south-west. None of the coasts is much indented; but of the 

three, the northern has the most noticeable bays and headlands. 

Here are the gulfs of Castel-a-Mare, Palermo, Patti, and Milazzo ; 



PARTI.] GEOGRAPHICAL OUTLINE. 331 

the headlands of Trapani (Drepanum), Capo St. Vito, Capo di 
Gallo, Capo 'L2i'^ds2Lrv2,^ Capo Orlando, Capo Calava, and Capo 
Bianco. The south-western, and most of the eastern, shores run 
in smooth lines ; but towards the extreme south-east of the island 
there is a fair amount of indentation. Good harbours are numerous. 
The most remarkable are those of Messana and Syracuse, the 
former protected by a curious curved strip of land, resembling 
a sickle, whence the old name of Zancle ^ the latter rendered secure 
in all winds by the headland of Plemmyrium and the natural 
breakwater of Ortygia. There are also excellent ports at Lily- 
bseum and Panormus (Palermo). The mountain system of Sicily 
consists of a main chain, the continuation of the Bruttian Apen- 
nines ( Aspromonte) , which traverses the island from east to west, 
beginning near Messina (Messana) and terminating at Cape 
Drepanum. This main chain, known in its different parts by 
various names, throws off, about midway in its course, a strong 
spur, which strikes south-east and terminates in Cape Pachynus 
(Passaro). Thus the island is divided by its mountain system into 
three tracts of comparative lowland — a narrow tract facing north- 
wards between the main chain and the north coast; a long and 
broad tract facing the south-west, bounded on the north by the 
western half of the main chain, and on the east by the spur ; and 
a broad but comparatively short tract facing the east, bounded on 
the west by the spur, and on the north by the eastern half of the 
main chain. In none of these lowlands, however, is there really 
much flat country. Towards the north and towards the south- 
west^ both the main chain and the spur throw off numerous 
branches, which occupy almost the whole country between the 
rivers ; while towards the east, where alone are there any extensive 
plains, volcanic action has thrown up the separate and independent 
mountain of Etna^ which occupies with its wide-spreading roots 
almost one-third of what should naturally have been lowland. 
Thus Sicily, excepting in the tract between Etna and Syracuse, 
where the famous •= Piano di Catania' extends itself, is almost 
entirely made up of mountain and valley, and, in a military point 
of view, is an exceedingly strong and difficult country. Its chief 
rivers are the Simaethus on the east, which drains nearly the whole 
of the great plain ; the Himera and Halycus on the south ; and 
the Hypsa, near the extreme south-west corner. The only im- 
portant native town was Enna, nearly in the centre of the island; 



332 ROME. [BOOK V. 

all the other cities of any note were settlements of foreigners; 
Eryx and Egesta, or Segesta, of the Trojans (?) ; Lilybseum, Motya, 
Panormus, and Soloeis, or Soluntum, of the Carthaginians ; Himera, 
Messana, Tauromenium, Naxos, Catana^ Megara Hyblaea, Syra- 
cuse, Camarina, Gela, Agrigentum, and Selinus, of the Greeks. 
(On the history of the Greek settlements, see above, pp. 158-164.) 
27. Sardinia, which modern surveys show to be larger than 
Sicily, has an area of probably about 11,000 square miles. 
It is an oblong parallelogram, the sides of which 
may be viewed roughly as facing the four cardinal 
points, though in reality the south side has a slight inclination 
towards the east, and the north side a stronger one towards 
the west. Though less mountainous than either Sicily or Corsica, 
Sardinia is traversed by an important chain, which runs parallel 
with the eastern and western shores, but nearer the former, from 
Cape Lungo-Sardo on the north to Cape Carbonara at the extreme 
south of the island. This chain throws Out numerous short branch 
ranges on either side, which cover nearly the whole of the eastern 
half of the island. The western half has three separate mountain- 
clusters of its own. One, the smallest, is at the extreme north- 
west corner of the island, between the Gulfs of Asinara and 
Alghero ; another, three or four times larger, fills the south-western 
corner, reaching from Cape Spartivento to the Gulf of Oristano. 
Both these are, like the main range, of primary (granitic) forma- 
tion. The third cluster, which is interposed between the two 
others, occupying the whole tract extending northwards from the 
Gulf of Oristano and the river Tirso to the coast between the 
Turrilano and Coguinas rivers, is much the largest of the three, 
and is of comparatively recent volcanic formation. These moun- 
tain-clusters, together with the main range, occupy by far the 
greater portion of the island. They still, however, leave room for 
some important plains, as especially that of Campidano on the 
south, which stretches across from the Gulf of Cagliari to that of 
Oristano ; that of Ozieri on the north, on the upper course of the 
Coguinas ; and that of Sassari in the north-west, which reaches 
across the isthmus from Alghero to Porto Torres. Sardinia is 
fairly fertile, but has always been noted for its malaria. Its chief 
river was the Thyrsus (Tirso). The principal cities were Caralis 
(Cagliari), on the south coast, in the bay of the same name ; Sulci, 
at the extreme south-west of the island, opposite the Insula 



PARTI.] GEOGRAPHICAL OUTLINE. 333 

Plumbaria ; Neapolis, in the Gulf of Asinara ; and Olbia, towards 
the north-eastern end of the island. There was no city of any 
importance in the interior. 

28. Corsica, situated directly to the north of Sardinia, was 
more mountainous and rugged than either of the other two great 
islands. A strong mountain-chain ran through the 

island from north to south, culminating towards 
the centre in the Mons Antaeus (Monte Rotondo). Numerous 
branch ranges intersected the country on either side of the main 
chain, rendering the entire region one of constant mountain and 
valley. Streams were numerous; but the limits of the island 
were too narrow for them to attain any considerable size. The 
chief town was Alalia (afterwards Aleria), a colony of the Phocaeans. 
Besides this, the only places of any importance were Mariana, on 
the east coast, above Alalia, Centurimum (now Centuri), on the 
west side of the northern promontory, Urcinium on the west coast 
(now Ajaccio), and Talcinum (now Corte) in the interior, 

29. The lesser islands adjacent to Italy were Ilva (Elba), between 
northern Corsica and the mainland; Igilium (Giglio) and Dia- 
nium (Giannuti), opposite the Mons Argentarius in 

Etruria ; Palmaria, Pontia, Sinonia, and Pandataria, 
oiF Anxur; Pithecussa (Ischia), Prochyta (Procida), and Capreae 
(Capri), in the Bay of Naples; Strongyle (Stromboli), Euonymus 
(Panaria), Lipara (Lipari), Vulcania (Volcano), Didyme (Salina), 
Phoenicussa (Felicudi), Ericussa (Alicudi), and Ustica, off the north 
coast of Sicily ; the ^Egates Insula, off the western point of the 
same island ; the Choerades Insute^ off Tarentum ; and Trimetus 
(Tremiti) in the Adriatic, north of the Mons Garganus. 

On the geography of Italy, the most important works are — 

Cluverius, Italia Antiqua. Lugd. Bat., 1624; 2 vols, folio. 

ROMANELLI, Antica Topograjia istorica del Regno di Napoli. Napoli, 18 15; 
3 vols. 4to. 

Mannert, K., Geographie der Griechen und Romer aus ihren Schriften darge- 
stellt. Leipzig, 1801-29; 10 vols. 8vo. 

Swinburne, H., Tra-veh in the Tivo Sicilies in the Tears 1777-80. London, 
1783-85 ; 2 vols. 4to. 

Dennis, G., Cities a^id Cemeteries of the Etruscans. London, 1848 ; 2 vols. 8vo. 

AB'K^^^,Mittel- It alien vorden Zeiten Romisc her Herrsc haft. Stuttgart, 1843; 8 vo. 

Cramer, Geographical and Historical Description of Ancient Italy. Oxford,. 
1826 ; 2 vols. 8vo. 

A comprehensive work on the subject, combining local knowledge with 
advanced scholarship and a good knowledge of the ancient authorities, is still 
a desideratum. 



334 ROME. [book v. 

SKETCH OF THE HISTORY. 
FIRST PERIOD. 

The Ancient Traditional History from the Earliest Times to the 
Commencement 0/ the Republic, B.C. 508. 

Sources. 1. Nati've. A few fragments of the Fasti Triumphales belong to 
this early period ; but such knowledge of it as we possess is derived mainly from 
the works of historians. Among these the first place must be assigned to the 
fragments of the early Annalists, especially of Q^Fabius Pictor, many of which 
are preserved in Dionysius of Halicarnassus. The most copious native 
writer on the period is Livy, who delivers an account of it in his First Book. 
Other native authorities are Cicero, who has sketched the constitutional 
history of the period in his treatise De Republka (book ii.), and Florus, who 
has briefly epitomised it. The portion of Velleius Paterculus which 
treated of the time is almost entirely lost. No lives of Nepos touch on it. 
Many allusions to it are contained, however, in the works of the poets and 
grammarians, as OviD (^Fasti),'Sf IRGIL (^^Eneid, book vi.), Servius {ad JEneid.'), 
Festus, and others. 2. Foreign. The Greek writers are fuller on the early 
history than the Roman. The most important of them is Dionysius of YLdXi- 
carnassus, in whose work (^rc/?ffo/o^?« jRoOT««<a: ; ed. Reiske. Lipsise, 1774-77; 
6 vols. 8vo.) the ante-regal and regal periods occupy the first four books. 
Next to Dionysius may be placed Plutarch, whose Lives of Romulus, 
Numa, and Poplicola bear upon this portion of the history. The part of 
DiODORUS SicuLUS which treated of the time (books vii.-x.) is lost, with the 
exception of a few brief fragments. 

On the value of these sources the most diametrically opposite opinions 
continue to be held after a controversy which has lasted more than a century. 
The negative criticism, which was begun by Perizonius, Bayle, and Beaufort, 
received a strong impulse, early in the present century, from the great work of 

NiebuhR, B. G., Romische Geschichte. Berlin, 1826-32 ; 3 vols. Svo. 
(First and second volumes translated by Julius Hare and Bp. Thirlwall. 
Cambridge, 1831-32 ; third volume translated by Dr. W. Smith, and 
Dr. L. ScHMiTZ. London, 1842; 8vo.) ; which was followed in England by 
the very popular work of 

Arnold, Dr. T., History of Rome. London, 1838-43; 3 vols. 8vo ; and 
in Germany, after an interval of a quarter of a century, by that of 

SCHWEGLER, A., Romische Geschichte. Tubingen, 1853-58 ; 3 vols. Svo. 
Written in the true spirit of the Tiibingen School. 

The doubts of the last-named writer, falling on congenial soil in this country, 
produced an elaborate, but intensely sceptical work, which has probably 
exhausted all that can be said on the negative side of the subject, viz. 

Lewis, Sir G. C, On the Credibility of the Early Roman History. London, 
1855 ; 2 vols. 8vo. 

On the opposite side of the question some important treatises have been 
published recently. Note especially the following : — 

Ampere, J. J., UHistoire Romaine a Rome. Paris, -1862-64; 4 vols. 8vo. 
The writer argues that the discoveries made by recent excavations with 
regard to the original Rome strongly confirm the early traditional history. 

Dyer, T. H., History of the City of Rome. London, 1865; 8vo. ; and the 
same writer's History of the Kings of Rome. London, 1868 ; 8vo. It is 



PAETi. PER. I.] RACES OF ITALY. 335 

Mr. Dyer's object to show, first, that authentic materials for the early history 
existed in the times of the first Annalists, B.C. 220 to 200 ; and secondly, that 
the internal difficulties and discrepancies are not such as to render the history 
that has come down to us incredible. 

Works of a more dogmatic and less argumentative character, embracing 
the early period, or distinctly written upon it, worthy of the reader's attention, 
are the following : — 

Newman, F., Regal Rome ; an Introduction to Roman History. London, 1852 ; 
1 2 mo. 

MOMMSEN, Th., Romische Geschichte. 3rd edition. Berlin, 1861 ; 3 vols. Bvo. 
The value of this very original work is greatly diminished by the almost entire 
absence of references. (Translated by W. P. Dickson. London, 1862 ; 3 vols, 
small 8vo.) 

Keightley, T,, i7/j?orj/o/"i?oOT^. London, 1836. A useful compendium. 

KORTUEM, F., Romische Geschichte. Heidelberg, 1843 ; 8vo. 

LiDDELL, H. G., History oj" Rome from the Earliest limes to the Establishment 
of the Empire. London, 1855 ; 2 vols. 8vo. 

Gregorovius, F., Geschichte der Stadt Rom. Stuttgart, 1859-62 ; 4 vols. 
8vo. 

Peter, C, Geschichte Roms. Halle, 1865-67 ; 3 vols. 8vo. 

I. Italy was inhabited, at the earliest times to which our know- 
ledge carries us back, by five principal races. These were the 
Ligurians, the Venetians, the Etruscans, the Italians ^, . , 

<=> :) J J Chief races 

proper, and the lapygians. The Ligurians and of ancient 
Venetians may have been branches of one stock, the ^ ^' 

Illyrian ^ but there is no sufficient evidence to prove this connec- 
tion. They were weak and unimportant races, confined to narrow 
regions in the north, and without any influence on the general 
history of Italy. Setting them aside, therefore, for the present, we 
may confine our attention to the three other races. 

3. The lapygians were probably among the earliest settlers. 
The heel of Italy, which stretches out towards Greece, invites 
colonisation from that quarter; and it would seem 

1 ,-11 The lapvgians. 

that at a very remote date a stream or settlers passed 
across the narrow sea from the Hellenic to the Italic peninsula, 
and landing on the lapygian promontory spread themselves north- 
wards and westwards over the greater portion of the foot of Italy. 
The language of the race in question remains in numerous inscrip- 
tions which have been discovered in the Terra di Otranto, and 
shows them to have been nearly connected with the Greeks. Their 
worship of Greek gods, and the readiness with which, at a later 
date, they became actually Hellenised, point in the same direction. 
We have reason to conclude that a race kindred with the Greeks 
held in the early times the greater part of Southern Italy, which 
was thus prepared for the later, more positively Hellenic, settle- 
ments. To this stock appear to have belonged the Messapians, 



336 ROME. [book v. 

Peucetians, (Enotrians, the Chaones or Chones, and perhaps the 

Daunii. 

It is supposed by some that the lapygian migration took place by land, the 
settlers passing round the coast of the Adriatic Sea, and being pushed south- 
wards by later immigrants. This is possible ; but migration by sea may be 
accomplished even by a very primitive people. 

3. The Italians proper, who in the historical times occupy with 
their numerous tribes almost the whole of Central Italy, appear to 

The Italians have been later in-comers than the lapygians, to have 
proper. proceeded from the north, and to have pressed with 
great weight on the semi-Greek population of the southern regions. 
They comprised, apparently, four principal subordinate races j viz. 
the Umbrians, the Sabines, the Oscans, and the Latins. Of these 
the Umbrians and Oscans were very closely connected. The 
Latins were quite distinct. The Sabines are suspected to have 
been nearly allied to the Osco-Umbrians. 

The Sabine race was remarkable for its numerous subdivisions. It com- 
prised the Sabini proper, the Samnites, the Picentes (probably), the Marsi, 
Marrucini, Peligni, and Vestini, the Frentani, the Gampani, and the Lucani. 
The Samnites had also subdivisions of their own, e. g. the Caraceni, the 
Pentri, and the Hirpini. 

There were also a considerable number of Oscan tribes ; as the Volsci, 
^qui, Hernici (?), Aurunci, Ausones, and Apuli. These names seem, how- 
ever, to be chiefly variants of the general ethnic title. 

4. The Tuscans or Etruscans, the most powerful nation of the 
north, differed in race completely from all the other inhabitants of 

Italy. It appears to be, on the whole, most probable 
that they were Turanians, of a type similar to that 
which is found in" various parts of Europe — Lapps and Finns in the 
extreme north, Esthonians on the Baltic, Basques in Spain — rem- 
nants of a primitive population that once, we may suppose, over- 
spread the whole of Europe. The original seat of the race, so far as it 
is traceable, seems to have been Rhcetia, or the country about the 
head-streams of the Rhine, the Inn, and the Adige. Their native 
name was Ras ; and this name, changed by the Italians into Rhsesi 
or Rhaeti, was long attached to the mountain region from which 
their hordes had issued. These hordes at a very remote time spread 
themselves over the plain of the Po from the Ticinus to beyond the 
Adige, and formed there, as we are told, a confederacy of twelve 
cities. (See above, p. 325.) After having flourished in this tract 
for an indefinite period, they overflowed the mountain barrier to 
the south, and occupying the region between the northern Apen- 
nines and the Tiber, formed there a second, quite separate, con- 



PABT I. PER. I.] RACES OF ITALY. 337 

federacy, consisting, like the northern one, of twelve distinct 
states. Subsequently, but probably later than the period now under 
consideration, they passed the Tiber and established temporarily 
a dominion in Campania, where Capua and Nola were cities 
founded by them. 

Characteristics of the Etruscans. Physically, they were a brawny 
stout race, short in stature, with large heads and thick arms, offering a strong 
contrast to the graceful and slender Italians. Their religious ideas were gloomy 
and strange. They delighted in auguries, in the mystical handhng of numbers, 
and in the exact observance of a minute and manifold ritual. There can be 
no doubt that they had made a considerable advance in the arts ; but it is still 
a question how far the works of art found in their tombs are of native pro- 
duction, how far mere imports from Greece. They were certainly the best 
architects of all the early Italian races, and the only race that showed a marked 
inclination to maritime pursuits. Tuscan corsairs covered the Western 
Mediterranean from a very early time; and Agylla had, before B.C. 550, an 
important trade. 

Among the most important works on the interesting subject of the language 
and art of the Etruscans are — 

Ingrirami, Monumenti Etruschi. Fiesole, 1821-26 ; 7 vols. 4to. 

Lanzi, Saggio di Lingua Etrusca e di altre antiche d'' Italia. Roma, 1789 ; 8vo. 
The edition of Florence, 1824-25, is the best. 

Dennis, G., Cities and Cemeteries of the Etruscans. (See above, p. 333.) 

MtJLLER, K. O., Die Etrusker. Breslau, 1828 ; 2 vols. 8vo. 

MiCALI, Storia degli Antichi Popoli Italiani. Firenze, 1832; 3 vols. 8vo. 

5. There can be no doubt that the Romans belonged, at any 
rate predominantly, to the second of the three races who seem in 
the early times to have divided the peninsula among q^.. .^ ^ ^ 
them — the race which has been here termed xar' Romans: the 
e^oxnv, ^ Italic' They had, indeed, a tradition which ^°^^^ '^^ °^^' 
coimected them with a body of immigrants, who were thought to 
have come by sea into Italy from the distant city of Troy, at a 
date which preceded by nearly 500 years the building of the city. 
And this tradition was brought out into great prominence by 
writers of the Imperial times. But, whatever amount of truth we 
may suppose to be contained in the ' story of JEneas,' it is evident 
that the crews of a few vessels landing on a thickly-peopled coast, 
and belonging to a race not much more civilised than that to which 
they came, could make but a very slight impression on the previous 
population, in which they would be sure to be very soon swallowed 
up and absorbed. The Trojan colony to Latium is therefore, 
whether true or false, a matter of small consequence — it had no 
part in determining the ethnic character of the Roman people. 

6. Nor is there much difficulty in deciding to which of the 
branch races included here under the general name of ' Italic,' the 
Romans belonged. Language is the most certain indication of 

z 



338 ROME. [BOOK v. 

race, and the language which the Romans spoke was Latin. Their 
The Romans own traditions connected the early city in a special 
really Latins, -^g^y ^j^]^ Lavinium and AJba Longa; and these 
cities were universally allowed to have been two of the thirty 
Latin towns. To whatever extent the Romans were a mixed 
people — and that they were so to some extent is admitted by all — 
it is impossible to doubt that they were predominantly and essen 
tially — not Oscans, not Sabines, much less Umbrians — but Latins. 
7. It is, however, far from easy to determine in what exact posi- 
tion the original Rome stood to the Latin stock. It is clear that she 
, , , was not a mere Latin town, not one of the thirty. She 

Rome probably -" ' 

a colony of Stands in the early times of the monarchy quite out- 
a onga. ^^^^ ^^ confederacy ; and a peculiar character belongs 
to her which is not simply and wholly Latin. The tradition 
which makes her foundation the spontaneous act of a band of 
adventurous young men, whose affection for the locality leads them 
to set up a new town, which is also a new state, on the spot 
where they have been wont to pasture their flocks, is at variance 
with the condition of Italy at the time, which was not a wilder- 
ness, with abundant waste land, whereon the first comer might 
settle, but a thickly-peopled country, where every inch of ground 
had an owner, or was disputed between neighbouring tribes. If 
there be any truth at all in the account which has come down 
to us of the original settlement, that account must be a poeticised 
version of a very ordinary occurrence. The Latin towns were 
in the habit of extending or defending their territories by the 
establishment of colonies. Nothing is more easily conceivable 
than that the original Rome should have been a colony from Alba 
Longa, planted in a strong though unhealthy position at the 
extreme verge of the territory, where it was threatened by the 
Tuscans upon the west and still more by the advancing Sabines 
towards the north. Rome herself was afterwards accustomed to 
plant her colonies in exactly such positions. Among the various 
conjectures which critics have formed on the subject of the origin 
of Rome, that which regards her as a colony from Alba appears 
to be the most worthy of acceptance. 

The list of the Alban kings cannot be regarded as in any sense belonging to 
Roman history, for the history of a colony dates from its foundation. Were the 
list genuine, it would be an important record for early Italian history, as distinct 
from Roman. But the catalogue has all the appearance of being a forgery. 

8. But if Rome was originally a mere Alban dependency, it is 



PAKT I. PER. I.] REGAL PERIOD. 33.9 

certain that she did not long continue such. The first clearly 
marked fact in her history is her entrance into volun- Rome 
tary union with the natives of an adjacent Sabine "'^^P^"'^^'^*-- 

The syncecisnuis 

settlement, an act which implies independence and with the 
the assertion of sovereignty. The colony must either Sabmes. 
previously have shaken o& the yoke of the mother-city, or else 
must, in the very act of uniting herself with an alien people, have 
asserted autonomy. From the date of the (twoikktiios^ if no earlier, 
Rome was, it is clear, a self-governing community. No power 
exercised control over her. She stood aloof from the Latin league, 
on terms which were at first rather hostile than friendly. Her 
position was unique among the states and cities of the period. The 
amalgamation of two bloods, two civilisations, two kindred, but 
still somewhat different, religious systems, produced a peculiar 
people — a people stronger than its neighbours, possessing wider 
views and sympathies, and more varied tastes — a people better 
calculated than its neighbours to form a nucleus round which the 
various tribes of the Italic stock might gather themselves. 

9. While the history of individuals at this remote period is 
wholly wanting — for such names as Romulus, Remus, Celer, Titus 
Tatius, and the like, cannot be regarded as having 
anything more of historic substance than their paral- history con- 
lels, Hellen, Dorus, Ion, Amyclas, Hoples, &c., the stitutional 

, ' ' ' { ' ^ ' 'not personal. 

heroes eponymi of Greek legend — it is not impossible 

to trace out the early character of the government, the chief 
features of the constitution, the principal divisions and subdi- 
visions of classes within the community, and the rights and 
privileges attaching to each. Tradition is a trustworthy guide 
for certain main features^ analogy and analysis may be allowed 
to furnish others ; for the laws of the growth of states are suffi- 
ciently well known and sufficiently uniform to make it possible 
in most cases, where we have before us a full-grown constitution, 
to trace it back to its foundations, and gather a fair knowledge of 
its history from the form and character of its several parts. 

1 o. The known points of the early constitution are the follow- 
ing: — {a) The form of government was monarchical. A chief, 

called 'rex,' i.e. 'ruler/ or 'director,' stood at the ^, . ^ . . 
' ' ' Chief points 

head of the state, exercising a great, though not an of the early- 
absolute, power over the citizens, {h) The monarchy 
was not hereditary, but elective. When the king died, there was 

2- 2 



340 ROME. [book v. 

an ' interregnum/ The direction of aflFairs was taken by the Senate 
The kin th °^ Council, whose ten chief men ('Decem Primi') 
Patres, and exercised the royal authority, each in his turn, for five 
the Chents. ^^^^^ j^ belonged to the Senate to elect, and to the 
people to confirm the king, (c) Under the king was, first of all, a 
hereditary nobility (' patricii '), members of certain noble families, 
not deriving their nobility from the king, but possessing it by 
immemorial descent. These noble families or 'houses' ('gentes') 
were, prior to the (tvvoiki(t[i.6sj one hundred in number- after the 
<TvvoiKi(T[x6s, two hundred. Each was represented by its chief in 
the council of the king (' senatus ') j and thus the senators were 
originally one hundred, afterwards two hundred. All the members 
of a ' house ' had one name (' nomen gentilitium ') ; all might par- 
ticipate in certain sacred rites (' sacra gentilitia ') j and all had 
certain rights of property in common, (d) All the males of full 
age belonging to the nobility possessed the right of attending the 
public Assembly ('comitia'), where they voted in ten bodies 
(' curiae '), each composed of the members of ten ' houses.' Each 
curia had its chief, called ' curio j' and the Assembly was presided 
over by the chief of the ten curionesy who was called ' Curio 
Maximus.' {e) Every change of law required the consent of both 
the Senate and the Assembly. The Senate had the right of dis- 
cussing and voting, but the Assembly had the right of voting only. 
The Assembly was also privileged to determine on peace or war • 
and if one of its members appealed to it from the sentence of the 
king, or of a judge, it determined the appeal and condemned or 
acquitted at its pleasure. (/) In addition to the members of the 
' gentes,' the early Roman state contained two other classes. These 
were the Clients and the Slaves. The Slaves resembled persons of 
their class in other communities ; but the Clients were a peculiar 
institution. They were dependents upon the noble ' houses,' and 
personally free, but possessed of no political privileges, and usually 
either cultivated the lands of their 'patrons,' or carried on a trade 
under their protection. They resembled to a considerable extent 
the ' retainers ' of the Middle Ages. 

II. Under this constitution, Rome flourished for a period which 

_. . . r is somewhat vague and indefinite, without the oc- 
- Division of ^^ ' 

the monarchy currence of any important change. According to one 

Ladnlndslbine tradition, a double monarchy was tried for a short 

Romans. time, in order that the two elements of the state — 



PAET I. PEE. I.] REGAL PERIOD. 341 

the Roman and the Sabine (or the Ramnes and the Titles) — 
might each furnish a ruler from their own body. But the experi- 
ment was not tried for very long. In lieu of it, we may suspect 
that for a while the principle of alternation was employed, the 
Romans and the Sabines each in their turn furnishing a king to 
the community. 

This seems to be implied in the ordinary narrative, which gives, as the first 
four kings — 1. Romulus (Latin from Alba) ; 2. Numa (Sabine) ; 3. Tullus 
(Latin from Medullia) ; and 4. Ancus (Sabine — grandson of Numa). 

12. The duplication of the community, which was thus per- 
ceptible through all ranks, affected also to a considerable extent 
the national religion. Not only was there a dupli- Traces 
cation of the chief religious officers in consequence of the two 

r ^ . . 1 1 1- • nationalities 

or the synmtsmus^ but sometimes the duplication in the 

extended to the objects of worship, the deities them- religion, 
selves. Quirinus, for instance, seems to have been the Sabine 
Mars, worshipped, like the Latin Mars, by his own ' Flamen ' and 
college of 'Salii.' Juno was perhaps the Sabine equivalent of the 
Latin Diana, another form of the same name, but in the popular 
belief a different goddess. In the ranks of the hierarchy the dupli- 
cation was more marked. It can be traced in the college of the 
Pontifices, in that of the Augurs, in that of the Vestal Virgins, 
in the priesthoods of Mars, and (probably) in the priesthood of 
Hercules. 

Character of the Roman Religion. («) Less imaginative and more 
matter-of-fact than the Greek. {b~) Consisted mainly in the recognition of 
certain obligations (religiones) ; viz. (i.) the obligation to worship each of the 
state gods with sacrifices of a stated kind at stated times, and to keep certain 
festivals ; (ii.) the obligation on the part of the paterfamilias to make daily 
offerings to the * Lares ' of his own household ; (iii.) the obligation to perform 
vows and to make occasional thank-offerings ; (iv.) the obligation to abstain 
from business on ' dies nefasti.' (c) Though mainly of home growth, con- 
tained a certain number of foreign elements, derived chiefly from contact 
with the Greeks. The most important of these was behef in the value of 
oracles, shown in the practice of consulting the Sibylline books. 

13. The names which tradition assigned to the early Roman 
monarchs seem to be fictitious. Romulus, Titus Tatius, and 
Numa Pompilius are personifications rather than Reign of 
personages. We first touch on personal history Tullus Hos- 

t , _, , , ^ , tilius. Personal 

in the Roman records when we come to the history 
name of Tullus Hostilius, the fourth, or, omitting hegms. 
Tatius, the third traditional king. There is every reason to 
believe that this monarch actually lived and reigned j his name 



342 ROME. [BOOK V. 

was the first that was handed down to posterity owing to the fact 
that he was the first king who efFected an important conquest, 
and raised Rome from a humble position to one of dignity and 
eminence. It is the great glory of TuUus that he conquered Alba 
Longa, the chief of the Latin cities, the mother-city of Rome 
itself. His conquest probably doubled, or even tripled, the Roman 
territory ; it prepared the way for that hegemony of Rome over 
all Latium to which she owed her subsequent greatness; and 
it largely increased the population of Rome, and the military 
strength of the nation. For Tullus was not content with a simple 
conquest. Following up the principle of syneecismusj which had 
already been found to answer, he destroyed Alba, except its 
temples, and transferred the inhabitants to his own capital. He 
thus greatly strengthened the Latin element in the Roman state, 
and made the Sabines a mere modifying influence in a com- 
munity essentially Latin. 

Internal changes consequent on the destruction of Alba. The Alban 
nobles (Luceres ?) being added to the Patrician body on the plan already- 
adopted upon the junction of the primitive Romans, or Ramnes, with the 
Sabines (Tities), the tribes became three, the curice thirty, and the ' houses ' 
three hundred. The Senate, however, continued at its former number of 
two hundred, the privilege of sending their representatives into it not being at 
first conceded to the Alban houses. No change was made in the chief sacred 
offices — those of the Flamens, Pontifices, and Augurs— but as the home of the 
Alban race was now transferred to Rome, the college of Vestal Virgins was 
increased from four to six. 

14. The next Roman king whose name has descended to us is 

Ancus Martius, who is said to hiave belonged to the Sabines or 

Tities. This monarch appears to have been re- 

Ancu?Mar- garded by the later Romans as the founder of the 

tius. Rise Plebeian order. He pursued the policy of Tullus 
of the ' Plebs." ,,. ,. ^ .,, . ^. 

both in makmg war on neighbouring Latin towns, 

and in using his victories for the aggrandisement of his capital by 
transferring to Rome the populations of the conquered states. A 
portion of the new settlers undoubtedly became Clients ; but the 
richer and more independent would decline to take up this 
relationship, and would be content with the protection of the 
king. Hence would come a sudden augmentation of that free com- 
monalty, which must always grow up — out of various elements — 
in all states which commence, like Rome, with a privileged class 
of nobles, and a wholly unprivileged class of retainers or de- 
pendants. 



PART I. PER. I.] REGAL PERIOD. 343 

Elements of a * Plebs ' or Commonalty. («) Free settlers ; either poli- 
tical refugees, mercenary soldiers, or traders. The first-named would be 
numerous in a time of so much disturbance as that in which Rome grew up. 
(^) Forced settlers. To this class would belong the whole of the conquered 
populations, except such as were either formally admitted into the Patrician 
body, or voluntarily attached themselves as retainers to a noble house. 
{e) Clients, whose ' family,' or, at any rate, whose ' gens,' died out and became 
extinct, {d) The issue of marriages of inequality, i. e. of all cases in which 
a Patrician took to wife a person of a class which did not possess the right of 
intermarriage with the noble houses ('jus connubii '). This last element 
would be small but very important. 

15. The time at which it becomes necessary or expedient, in 
such a community as the Roman^ to recognise the existence of the 
commonalty in a formal way, by the grant of poli- 
tical or municipal rights, varies with circumstances recognised 
within very wide limits. At Rome the recognition ^J Ancus. 

' '-' He assigns 

took place early, matters coming rapidly to a head it the 
in consequence of the quick growth of the territory, ventine. 
and especially of the practice, which the kings pursued, of remov- 
ing large masses of the conquered populations to their capital. 
If, as we are told, Ancus gave up the entire Aventine Hill, pre- 
viously uninhabited, to his new settlers, thus assigning to their 
exclusive occupation a distinct quarter of the capital, municipal 
institutions must have been at the same time granted, for a whole 
quarter of a town cannot be surrendered to anarchy. The ' Plebs ' 
must at once have had ^sediles,' if not 'tribunes;' and a machinery 
must have been established for their election, since nomination by 
the monarch is not to be thought of. But of the details of Ancus' 
regulations, whatever they were, we have no knowledge, the later 
arrangements of Servius having not only superseded but obli- 
terated them. 

16. Among the other acts assigned to Ancus Martius^ the most 
important are, the extension of the Roman territory to the sea, 
and the establishment of the port of Ostia ; the con- other acts 
struction of salt-pans [saline) in its neighbourhood ; of Ancus. 
the erection of the ' pons sublicius,' or ' bridge of piles,' across the 
Tiber, and the occupation of the Janiculan Hill by a strong fort, 
or tete du font ; the draining of some of the low land about the 
Seven Hills by the 'Fossa Quiritium,' and the construction of the 
first prison. It would seem that civilisation was advancing with 
both its advantages and its drawbacks — trade, manufactures, and 
engineering skill on the one hand j on the other, crime and its 
repression. 



344 ROME. [bookv. 

The curious notion of a modern historian, that Rome was from the first 
differentiated from the rest of the Latin nation by a peculiarly commercial 
character, is remarkably at variance with the tradition, that she obtained her 
first access to the sea in the reign of Ancus. 

17. The next known king of Rome is L. Tarquinius Priscus. 
According to the tradition, he was a refugee from the Etruscan 

Reign of town of Tarquinii ; according to the evidence fur- 
Tarquinius nished by his name and by his acts, he was a Latin, 

Priscus. His 

constitutional probably belonging to one of the noble ' houses ' 
changes. fj-Qj^ Alba. Two important constitutional changes 
are attributed to him. [a) He raised the ideal number of the 
Senate from two hundred to three hundred, by adding to it the 
representatives of the ' Gentes Minores,' or ' Younger Houses ' — 
who can scarcely be different from the ' houses ' adopted into the 
Patrician body from among the nobles of Alba. If he were him- 
self a member of one of these *houses,'his act would, it is clear, have 
been thoroughly natural. (^) He 'doubled the equestrian centu- 
ries,' or, in other words, the 4!c/«tf/ number of the Patrician 'houses.* 
The ' houses ' had, apparently, so dwindled, that instead of the ideal 
number of three hundred, the actual number was but one hundred 
and fifty, or thereabouts. Tarquin proposed to add one hundred 
and fifty new ' houses ' from among the nobles who had settled at 
Rome after the addition of the Albans ; these he proposed to add 
in three new tribes, which were to stand side by side with the 
three old tribes of the Ramnes, Titles, and Luceres. Opposed by 
the Patricians, who put forward , the augur, Attus Navius, as 
objector, he yielded so far as to create no new tribes ; but still he 
added the new 'houses' in three new half- tribes, attaching them to 
the old Ramnes, Titles, and Luceres, but on terms of slight 
inferiority. 

According to Cicero, the distinction of ' Gentes Majores ' and ' Gentes 
Minores ' applied to the ' houses ' anterior to, and the * houses ' constituted 
by Tarquinius Priscus ; but Livy and Dionysius regard the distinction as 
established earlier. 

18. The wars of Tarquinius Priscus were also of importance. 
He repulsed a fierce attack of the Sabines, who had crossed the 

Anio and threatened Rome itself. He then attacked 

the Latin towns on the Upper Tiber and in the angle 

between the Tiber and the Anio, and reduced all of them except 

Nomentum. Antemn«, Crustumerium, Ficulea or Ficulnea, 

Medullia, Caenina, Corniculum, and Cameria were among his 



PAET I. PER. I.] REGAL PERIOD. 345 

conquests. After this, towards the close of his reign, he engaged 
in a war, on the other side of the Tiber, with the Etruscans, and 
gained important successes. 

19. Tarquinius Priscus was distinguished among the kings of 
Rome for the number and the character of his great works. To him 
is ascribed by the best authorities the Cloaca Maxima, jjjg g^eat 
the most remarkable monument now existing of the works. 
regal period, a construction of the grandest and most massive de- 
scription. Connected with the Cloaca, and undoubtedly the work 
of the same builder, was a strong and solid quay along the left 
bank of the Tiber, which checked the natural inclination of the 
river to flow off on that side and to inundate the low lands about 
the Palatine and Capitoline Hills. Tarquin further constructed 
for the entertainment of the people a * Circus,' or race-course, 
known as the ' Circus Maximus -^ and he also designed and com- 
menced the great Temple of Jove, on the Capitoline Hill, which 
was completed by the last monarch. 

Is there any reason for regarding these massive works as ' Etruscan ' in 
character ? Was not the early architecture of the Latins Just as massive as 
that of their neighbours across the Tiber, and indeed very similar to it in all 
respects? The remains at Prseneste, Tibur, Tarracina, and other Latin 
towns are as massive as any in Etruria. 

20. Tarquinius Priscus appears to have been succeeded in the 
kingdom by Servius Tullius. According to the account which has 
most verisimilitude, Servius was an Etruscan, one of 

a body of mercenaries whom Tarquin had employed ServiusTulUus. 
and had settled in his capital. He took advantage His Etrascan 

War. 

of his position about the monarch's person to conceal 
his death for a time, and act in his name ; after which he boldly 
threw off the mask, and openly usurped the throne. Having gained 
considerable successes against the Etruscans, he felt himself strong 
enough to devise and carry through a complete change of the 
constitution. Hitherto, the whole political power, except that 
wielded by the king, had been engrossed by the noble * Houses.' 
Servius determined to admit all ranks of freemen to the franchise. 
Taking the existing arrangements of the army as a 
groundwork, he constructed a new Assembly (' comi- ment^of "the 
tia centuriata '), in which all free Romans found a ' Comitia 

1 T-x- • 1- 1 • . . , , , centuriata.' 

place. Dividing the citizens into ' classes accord- 
ing to the amount of their property, he then subdivided the 'classes' 
into a larger or smaller number of 'centuries' according to the 



346 ROME. [book v. 

aggregate of the property possessed by the 'class;' and to each 

century, whatever the number of the persons composing it, he gave 

a single vote. The result was that a decidedly preponderating 

power was given to the richer classes ; but if they differed among 

themselves, the poorer classes came in and decided the point in 

dispute. 

Details of the Comitia Centuriata. With regard to the main points, 
the three great authorities, Cicero, Livy, and Dionysius, are agreed ; but with 
respect to minor points there is a good deal of discrepancy. Main Points : 
(a) The first place in the Assembly was given to the equites (horsemen), who 
formed eighteen centuries, six of which (sex suffragia, sex centurioe) were exclu- 
sively Patrician, while the remaining twelve were mixed, being composed 
indifferently of Patricians, Plebeians, and (perhaps) Clients. A property quali- 
fication, amount unknown, separated off this class from the rest. (J?) The 
bulk of the citizens below the ' equites ' were divided into five ' classes,' accord- 
ing as their property amounted to 100,000, 75,000, 50,000, 25,000, and 12,500 
(Dionys.), or 11,000 (Livy) asses. The first class furnished 80 centuries, the 
second, third, and fourth 20 each, and the fifth 30. The number of individuals 
in the century rose as the property qualification sank. If (as is thought pro- 
bable) a century of the first class contained 75 men, then one of the second con- 
tained 100, of the third 150, of the fourth 300, and of the fifth 600. (f) There 
were a certain small number of centuries of professionals — artillerymen, and 
musicians — to which no property qualification attached, {d) The remainder of 
the free population, below the ' classes,' formed also a certain small number 
of centuries, not more at any rate than four, in the lowest of which were 
included even those who had nothing, (e) Finally, whatever the exact details, 
the arrangement was undoubtedly such, that, if the ' equites ' and the centuries 
of the first class were unanimous, the matter was determined ; a majority was 
obtained, and, in that case, the votes of the remaining centuries were not taken. 

31. Another important institution ascribed by good authority to 

the reign of Servius is that of the local tribes. Hitherto the only 

-T. . ,.^ ,. 'tribes' in Rome had been those of the Patrician 

His institution 

of the order — the Ramnes, Titles, and Luceres — which were 
oca ri es. hereditary and had no connection with localities. 
Servius divided the city into four, and the territory probably into 
twenty-six districts, and formed the landowners within every such 
district into a tribe. Each tribe had the right of meeting and 
appointing its own *^tribunus,' its 'aedilis,' and probably its 'judex' 
or 'judices.' It is doubtful whether the whole body of the tribes 
had at first the right of meeting together in one place ; but ulti- 
mately the right was asserted and exercised, the meeting-place for 
the whole body being the forum at Rome. Here were held the 
'comitia tributa,' which were not, perhaps, exclusively Plebeian, but 
which came to be so regarded from the great preponderance of the 
Plebeians in the class of landowners. The original object of 
Servius in creating this organisation was perhaps, as much as any- 
thing, the assessment and collection of the property-tax {tril>utum). 



PART I. PEE. I.] REGAL PERIOD. 347 

which the tribunes had to levy, collect, and pay into the treasury. 

He may also, however, have aimed at contenting the tnass of the 

Plebeians, by entrusting them to a considerable extent with the 

power of self-government. 

The four city tribes were called the Palatine, the Colline, the Esquiline, and 
the Suburran. Of the original country tribes the names of fifteen only are 
known. They are the ^milian, the Camilian, the Cluentian, the Cornelian, 
the Fabian, the Galerian, the Horatian, the Lemonian, the Menenian, the 
Papirian, the Papinian, the Romilian, the Sergian, the Veturian, and the 
Voltinian. There is an evident connection between these names and those of 
the Patrician ' houses.' 

22. Servius is also said to have made an allotment of land out 
of the public domain to needy Plebeians — an act which greatly 
exasperated the Patricians, who had hitherto enjoyed His allotment 
all the advantage to be derived from such land by °^ ^^"^^• 
means of their right of occupation {possessio). The land allotted 
appears to have lain on the right bank of the Tiber, consisting of 
tracts which had been ceded by the Etruscans after their defeat. 
(See above, § 20.) 

33. According to some authors, it was likewise this king who 
raised Rome externally into a new and most important position, 
getting her to be acknowledged as actual head of the His league 
entire Latin confederacy, or at any rate of all but few ""^^^ ^^^ Latms. 
recalcitrant towns, such as Gabii. This position was undoubtedly 
held by Rome at the close of the monarchy ; and it may have been 
first assumed in the reign of Servius. The position was not exactly 
that which had been occupied by Alba. Alba had been one of the 
thirty cities, exercising a presidency over her sister states, which 
gave her a superiority of rank and dignity, but no real control over 
the federation. Rome was never one of the Latin cities. Her 
position was that of a ' separate state, confronting the league,' 
equal to it, or even superior to it in power, and when accepted as 
a close ally, necessarily exercising a protectorate. By the terms 
of the treaty, equality between Rome and Latium was jealously 
insisted upon ; but, practically, Rome was paramount, and directed 
the policy of the league at her pleasure. 

24. An extension of the city of Rome accompanied this advance 
in her territorial influence and in her dignity. The 
original 'Roma quadrata' was confined to a single 's extension 
hill, the Palatine, of which perhaps it occupied only fortification 
the north-western half. From this centre the town ° ^ ' ^' 
spread to the neighbouring heights, the Esquiline on the north- 



348 ROME. [book v. 

east, and the Coelian on the south-east, whereon suburbs grew up, 
perched upon eminences, which together with the Palatine were 
seven in number, and constituted the primitive ' Septimontium/ 
The Rome which had these limits was confronted by a separate 
settlement, probably Sabine, on the hills (' colles ') directly to the 
north, the Capitoline, Quirinal, and Viminal. But after a while 
the two communities coalesced ; and the Rome of Tullus probably 
included the houses both of the ' Montani ' and the ' CoUini,' or 
those of the ' Mount-men ' and the ' Hill-men.' Ancus added a 
settlement on the Aventine, so completing the later 'Septimon- 
tium.' It remained, however, for Servius to enclose the various 
eminences, and a considerable space between and beyond them, 
within a single continuous line of wall. It is significative of 
the greatness of the Roman state at this time, that the ' walls of 
Servius ' sufficed for the city down to the time of Aurelian. 

Many excellent works have been written on the topography of Rome, espe- 
cially in recent times. The best are — ' 

Gell, Sir W., Topography of Rome and its Vicinity. London, 1846. 2nd 
edition. 

BuNSEN, Baron, Beschreibung der Stadt Rom. Stuttgart, 1829-49 5 3 vols. 
8vo. With Atlas. 

Becker, W. A., Handbuch der RJomischen Alterthilmer. Leipzig, 1843-64; 

3 vols. 8vo. 

Canini, L., Indicazione topograjica di Roma antica. Roma, 1850. 4th 
edition, 8vo. And the same writer's Edifizj di Roma Antica. Roma, 1840; 

4 vols, folio. 

Dyer, T., The History of the City of Rome. (See above, p. 334.) 

1,^. It is said that Servius, towards the close of a long reign, 
began to fear for the stability of his institutions, and planned 
His int nt" nieasures, which would, he hoped, secure their con- 
to abdicate, tinuance. He intended to abdicate, before doing so 
presiding at the election of two magistrates by the free 
votes of the people assembled in their centuries {comitia centuriata)^ 
who should be understood to be appointed to their office, not for 
life, but only for a single year. It should be their business, before 
the end of the year, to hold an assembly for the election of their 
successors j and thus the state would have passed, without violence 
or revolution, under the government of popular annual magistrates. 
The office of chief magistrate was, it is probable, to be open to 
both orders. But the members of the ' houses,' disgusted at this 
prospect, frustrated the monarch's plans by anticipating them. 
Before Servius could effect the changes which he had designed, they 
broke out in open revolt, murdered the aged monarch in the 



PART I. PEB. I.] REGAL PERIOD. 349 

Senate-house, and placed a Tarquin, the son of the former king 
of the same name, on the throne. 

26. L. Tarquinius Superbus, the last king of Rome, having 
gained his crown by the sole favour of the Patricians, acted no 
doubt in some respects oppressively towards the . 

other order. He set aside at once the whole con- Tarquinius 
stitution of Servius, and restored that which had His treatment 
existed under the earlier kings. But it may be of the 
questioned whether his oppression of the commonalty '^°™^"°"'^ ^■ 
ever proceeded further than this. Some writers represent him as 
grinding down the people by taskwork of a grievous and distasteful 
kind, and then, when they murmured, banishing them from Rome 
to distant colonies. But the works which seem to be rightfully 
assigned to the second Tarquin are not of such a character as to 
imply servile or grinding labour. Their object was most probably 
the contentation of the poorer classes, who obtained by means of 
them constant employment at good wages. And the planting of 
colonies was always a popular measure, involving, as it did of 
necessity, an allotment of fresh lands to needy persons. Again, the 
'cloacae' of Superbus, and his construction of permanent stone 
seats in the Circus Maximus, were for the advantage of the lower 
classes of the citizens. 

27. The real 'tyranny' of Superbus was over the Patricians. 
It cannot have commenced very early in his reign. When, how- 
ever, he felt himself securely settled upon the throne, ^{Ss. tyranny 
when he had made himself fairly popular with the over the 
bulk of the community, when, by the vigour of his and his ' 
external administration, he had acquired a reputation, expulsion. 
and perhaps an amount of military strength which made him care- 
less of offending the ' houses,' he ceased to respect the rights of 
the privileged class, and, dispensing with their assistance in the 
government, took the complete direction of affairs into his own 
hands. Perhaps this was not much more than earlier monarchs 
had done, when they felt themselves fairly established. But the 
spirit of the nobles was higher than it had formerly been. They 
had recently slain one king and set up another. They viewed 
Tarquin as their creature, and were indignant that he should turn 
against them. Still, had the tyranny of the monarch been merely 
political j had their persons and the honour of their families 
remained secure, it is quite possible that no outbreak would have 



35° - ROME. [BOOK V. 

occurred. But Tarquin^ suspicious of their intentions, commenced 
a series of prosecutions. He had charges brought against the most 
powerful Patricians, and took cognisance of them himself. Dis- 
allowing the right of appeal, he punished numbers by death or 
exile. Finally, the outrage upon a noble Patrician matron woke the 
smouldering discontent into a flame. Rebellion broke out j and, 
the monarch having sought safety in flight, the Patrician order, 
with the tacit acquiescence of the Plebeians, revolutionised the 
government. 

The vigour of Tarquin's administration to the last is indicated by the 
' Treaty with Carthage,' which he must have been negotiating at the time of 
his dethronement. The story of his dealings with Turnus Herdonius seems 
to indicate that he held a position of more authority with respect to the Latin 
league than had been occupied by Servius. And the terms used with respect 
to the Latins in the Treaty above mentioned confirm this view. The conquest 
of Gabii in his reign is probably a fact, though the circumstances of the con- 
quest may be fictitious. 

The great works of Tarquin were the Capitoline temple, the branch cloaca 
which drained into the Cloaca Maxima, the seats in the Circus Maximus, and 
perhaps the Cyclopian wall still existing at Signia. 

28. The chronology of the kingly period at Rome is extremely 
uncertain. Traditionally the period was reckoned at either 340 

Chronology °^ ^44 Y^ars. To Romulus were assigned 37 years ; 

of the regal to Numa, 39 (or 43) ; to TuUus, 32 j to Ancus, 24 J to 

perio . Tarquin !_, 38 j to Servius, 44; to Tarquin 11, 25 j 

and an ' interregnum ' of a year was counted between Romulus and 

Numa. It has been pointed out that the average duration of the 

reigns {^^ years nearly) is improbably long; and that the numbers 

bear in many points the appearance of artificial manipulation. 

On the earlier numbers in the list, and therefore upon the total, 

no dependence at all can be placed; for neither Romulus nor 

Numa can be regarded as real personages. There is reason to 

believe that the ^regifugium' took place in or about the year 

B. c. 508. Perhaps we may accept the traditions with respect to 

the later kings so far as to believe that the reigns of the last three 

monarchs covered the space of about a century, and those of the 

two preceding them the space of about half a century. The 

time that the monarchy had lasted before Tullus was probably 

unknown to the Romans at the period when history first began 

to be written. 

See on this subject the work of Algarotti, Saggio sopra la durata de' regni 
de' re di Roma, in his Opere (Venezia, 1791-4; 17 vols. 8vo.) ; and compare 
NiEBUHR, Roman History, vol. i. pp. 238-257, and LEWIS, Credibility of the Early 
Roman History, vol. i. pp. 411-546. 



PARTI. PER. II.] BEGINNINGS OF THE REPUBLIC. 351 



SECOND PERIOD. 

From the Foundation of the Republic to the Commencement of 
the Sanmite Wars, b. c. 508 to 340. 

Sources. The most copious authorities are, as before, LiVY (books ii.-vii.), 
and DiONYSlus (books v.-xi. and fragments of books xii.-xx.) ; to which may be 
added Plutarch, in his lives oi PopHcola, Coriolanus, zxidCamillus ; DiODORUS 
SicuLUS (books xi.-xvi.) ; and the fragments of Appian, and Dio Cassius. 
Occasional notices of the period, mostly of great value, are also found in 
POLYBius. For the chronology, the best authority is the important monu- 
ment dug up on the site of the Forum, and generally known as the Fasti Capi- 
tolini (see above, p. 7), which, so far as it goes, is invaluable. 

The period is scantily treated in the history of Mommsen, copiously in those 
of NiEBUHR, Arnold, and Peter. Mommsen, however, has published an 
important work on the chronology, entitled Die Romische Chronologie bis auf 
Ccesar. 2nd edition, Berlin, 1859; 8vo. 

1. The interest of the Roman history during the whole of this 
period belongs mainly to the internal affairs of the Republic, the 
struggle between the orders, the growth of the con- .„ ^ ^, . 

'^° 70 Wars of this 

stitution and of the laws • secondarily only, and by period 
comparison, slightly, to the external affairs, wars, """^po^t^^t. 
treaties, alliances, and conquests. With the three exceptions of 
the first Latin War, the Veientine contest, and the great attack of 
Gauls_, the wars are uneventful and unimportant. The progress 
made is slight. It may be questioned whether at the close of the 
period Terminus has advanced in any direction beyond the point 
which it had reached under the kings. The relations of Rome 
to Latium are certainly less close and less to the advantage of 
Rome at the close of the period than at its commencement ; and 
thus far, the power of the Roman state is diminished rather than 
augmented. 

2. The internal changes during the period are, on the contrary, 
of the highest interest and importance. They include the estab- 
lishment of the Plebeian Tribunate, the Decemviral 
constitution and legislation, the institution of the o/the'^ ^ 
Censorship, the experiments of the First and Second internal 
Military Tribunates, the re-establishment of the 
Consulship with the proviso that one consul should be a Plebeian, 
the infringement of the proviso, and the whole series of the early 
agrarian enactments and disturbances. There is no portion of 
the constitutional history of any ancient state which has a deeper 
interest than this — none from which lessons of greater value can 



352 ROME. [book v, 

be learnt. A certain amount of obscurity rests, indeed, upon many 
points, on which we should be glad to have clearer and more 
certain knowledge j but, despite this drawback^ the history is in the 
highest degree instructive, and will well reward the study of all 
those who love both order and freedom. 

3. The constitution established on the expulsion of Tarquin 
was, in part, the actualisation of the ideal of Servius, in part 

Constitution ^^ enlargement of that ideal, conceived in the same 
of B.C. 508. spirit. Servius had designed to entrust the govern- 
towards the ment of the state to two annual magistrates elected 
Plebeians. {^y ^]^q fj-gg voice of the centuries, and had made 
the centuries, in which all freemen were enrolled, the recognised 
Assembly of the Roman people. He had given the non-burghers 
generally the rights of municipal self-government ; of the election 
of their own 'tribunes/ 'aediles/ and 'judges;' and of the as- 
sessment and collection of their own taxes. But this, so far 
as appears, was all. The leaders of the revolution of B.C. 508 
went further. They restored the constitution of Servius, and they 
added to it. Two ' praetors,' or ' consuls,' were elected by the free 
voice of the centuries, according to a form of proceedings which 
Servius had left behind him in writing j and one of the first pair 
of consuls was a non-burgher or Plebeian. The Senate, which had 
dwindled under the later kings, partly from natural causes, partly 
by the deliberate policy of the tyrant, was completed to its ideal 
number of 300, by the addition of 164 life-members (' conscripti '), 
chosen from the richest of the ' equites,' of whom a considerable 
number were Plebeians. The right of appeal, suspended under 
the last king, was revived, and was so enlarged as to include all 
freemen. Thus, at the outset, the new constitution wore the 
appearance, at any rate, of equality. No sharp line of demarca- 
tion was drawn between the two orders in respect of personal 
freedom, or admissibility to political privilege ; and it is not too 
much to say, that, if the spirit which animated the Patrician body 
in B.C. 508 had continued to prevail, contentions and struggles 
between the two orders would never have arisen. 

4. But this fair prospect was soon clouded over. The Patricians 
Commence- had been induced to make the concessions above 

:^trician enumerated to the other Order, not from any sense 

oppression, of justice, but through fear of Tarquin and his 

partisans, who were labouring to bring about a restoration. Of 



PART I. PER. II.] PRESSURE OF DEBT. 353 

this there was for a time considerable danger. There was a 
royalist party among the Patricians themselves j and both the 
Etruscans and the Latins were inclined to espouse the quarrel of 
the deposed king. When^ however, this peril was past, when the 
chiefs of the royalist faction were banished or executed, when 
the Etruscans had met a resistance which they had not counted 
on, and the Latins had sustained the complete defeat of the Lake 
Regillus^ the policy of the Patricians changed. No Plebeian was 
allowed to enjoy the consulship after Brutus, and by degrees it 
grew to be forgotten that any but Patricians had ever been re- 
garded as eligible. No plan was adopted by which Plebeians 
could obtain regular entrance into the Senate- and, as their life- 
members died off, the council of the nation was once more closed 
to them. The whole power of the government was engrossed by 
the Patrician order j which, finding itself free from any check, 
naturally became overbearing and oppressive. 

The imminent danger of a restoration at one time is indicated by the 
story, which Livy tells, of the origin of the Dictatorship. Such an office was 
evidently no part of the original idea of the constitution ; but jj^^ 

was exactly what might naturally have been devised to meet Dictatorship. 
an emergency. If the circumstances were such as Livy 
mentions, the first Dictator must have been named by the Senate. In after 
times it is certain that the Senate claimed the right of nomination, though prac- 
tically they were generally satisfied to select the consul who should nominate. 

5. The loss of political privilege would not^ it is probable^ by 

itself, have called forth any active movement on the part of the 

commonalty. It required the stimulus of personal r^ ^- c 

■' T- ^ Operation 01 

suffering to stir up the law-loving Roman to offer the law of 
any resistance to constituted authority. This stimulus 
was found in the harsh enforcement, not long after the commence- 
ment of the Republic^ of the law of debtor and creditor — a law 
which, under the circumstances of the time, pressed heavily on 
vast numbers of the community, and threatened to deprive them 
of their personal freedom, if not even of their lives. 

Nature of the Roman Law of Debt. Distinction between debts arising 
from money lent and ordinary debts ; in the former case, both the property 
and the person answerable ; in the latter, the property only. Process of 
attaching the person troublesome and tedious. Rights of creditor, when the 
process was complete, extreme ; including certainly the right to use, or sell, 
the debtor as a slave, and probably the right to put him to death. At any 
rate, several creditors, by proceeding at once, obtained the right to put to 
death. Nature of the nexus, doubtful ; but no reasonable doubt that the 
practice grew up of persons, when they borrowed money, contracting to work 
out their debt by the performance of tasks set them by their creditors. Thus, 
practically, there were four classes of debtors:— (i) Persons who had bor- 

A a 



354 ROME. [book v. 

rowed under no special contract, and were still at liberty, proceedings not 
having been commenced against them ; (2) persons who had borrowed under 
a contract to work out their debts, who consequently spent the day, like slaves, 
but not as slaves, in the work-shops (ergastula) of their masters ; (3) persons 
against whom the law of debt was in course of enforcement, who were kept 
in custody by their creditors, but could not be compelled by them to do work 
of any kind ; and (4) persons against whom the law had been fully enforced, and 
who, having been assigned to their creditors {addictt), were their actual slaves. 

6. The operation of the law of debt acquired political import- 
ance, chiefly from the large number of the debtors at this period 

Causes of the history ; and it is therefore necessary to inquire 
of the general vvhat were the circumstances which caused the wide 

poverty: 

(i) Defection prevalence of indebtedness at the time — a prevalence 

(2) Conquest which threatened revolution. Now, in the first place, 
of Porsenna; nothing is more clear than that the change from the 

(3) Incursions ,•■ i.it-.ii- -ii 

of the Sabines Monarchy to the Republic was accompanied by a 
and Oscans. diminution in the power and prestige of Rome, which 
sank from a position of pre-eminence among the central Italian 
nations to one of comparative insignificance. The Latins pro- 
fited by the occasion to reclaim their complete independence ; the 
Etruscans assumed an aggressive attitude, and an Etruscan monarch, 
Lars Porsenna, appears to have actually for a term of years held 
Rome in subjection. This yoke was indeed shaken off after 
a while ; but a permanent result of the subjection remained in the 
loss of almost all the territory on the right bank of the Tiber. The 
Romans, whose lands lay on that side of the river, thus lost them ; 
while at the same time the separation between Rome and Latium 
laid the Roman territory on the south side of the river open to 
incursions. The Sabines and Oscans plundered and ravaged freely ; 
the crops were ruined, the farm buildings and implements destroyed, 
the cattle carried off. A general impoverishment was the natural 
consequence ; and this would of course be felt most by the poorest 
classes, and especially by those whose small plots of land were 
their sole means of sustenance. 

7. The poverty thus produced was further aggravated, t. By the 
exaction of taxes, which by the Roman system were assessed upon 

Aggravations individuals, not for a single year, but for a term of 
of the poverty. £yg years, and had to be paid for that term, whether 
the property on which they were levied remained in the possession 
of the individual or not • 3. By the high rate of interest, which, 
under the peculiar circumstances of the time, rose probably from 
the normal rate of 10 per cent, {unclarium foenus) to such rates as 



PART I. PEE. II.] THE FIRST SECESSION. 355 

30, 40, or perhaps even 50 per cent. ; 3. By the non-payment of 
the rents due to the treasury from the possessores^ the withholding 
of which caused the property-tax (trlbutum) to become a serious 
burthen ; 4. By the cessation of the system of allotments {divisio 
agrorum) instituted by Servius^ which was intended to compensate 
the Plebeians for their exclusion from the right oi possessio. 

8. When the sufferings of the poorer classes had reached to a 
certain height from the cruel enforcement of the laws concerning 
debt, murmurs and indignant outcries began to be rj,^^ ^^^^ 
heard. At first, however, the opposition of the dis- secession, 

B C 492 

contented took a purely legal shape. The Roman 
was a volunteer army, not a conscription ; and the Plebeians had 
been wont, at the call of the consuls, freely to offer their services. 
Now they declined to give in their names unless upon the promise 
of a redress of grievances. Promises to this effect were made and 
broken. The Plebeians then, driven to despair, 'seceded' — that is to 
say, they withdrew from Rome in a body, and proceeded to prepare 
for themselves new abodes across the Anio, intending to found a 
new city separate from the burgesses, where they might live under 
their own sole government. Such a step was no doubt revolution- 
ary ; it implied the complete disruption of the state ; but it was 
revolution of a kind which involved no bloodshed. The burghers, 
however, seeing in the step taken the ruin of both orders — for 
Rome divided against herself must have speedily succumbed to 
some one or other of her powerful neighbours — felt compelled to 
yield. The Plebs required as the conditions of their return, 
I. That all debts of persons who could prove themselves insolvent 
should be cancelled; 2. That all persons in the custody of their 
creditors on account of debt should be set at liberty ; and 3. That 
certain guardians of the Plebeian order should be annually elected 
by the nation at large, whose persons should be sacred, who should 
be recognised as magistrates of the nation, and whose special busi- 
ness should be to defend and protect from injury all Plebeians 
appealing to them. These were the famous ' Tribuni Plebis,' or 
' Tribunes of the Commons,' who played so important a part in 
the later history of the Republic. Their original number is 
uncertain ; but it would seem to have been either five or two. 

9. It is evident that the economical portion of this arrangement 
very insufficiently met the difficulty of the existing poverty ; and 
there can be little doubt that, besides the formal provisoes above 

A aa 



356 ROME. [book v. 

mentioned, there was an understanding that the Plebeian griev-^ 

S stem of ances should be redressed by an equitable system of 

allotments allotm.ents. Such a system was advocated shortly after- 

remldy a'^ainst wards, B.C. 484, by Sp. Cassius, one of the consuls 

the poverty, under whom the Plebs returned from their secession, 

but was violently opposed by the bulk of the Patrician order, and 

cost its advocate his life. Still, from time to time, concessions of 

this kind were made, to keep the Plebeians in good humour ; and 

gradually, as the territory once more grew in size, considerable 

portions of it were parcelled out to small proprietors. 

In B.C. 468, Ti. ^Emilius and L. Valerius brought forward an agrarian law, 
which was opposed by Ap. Claudius, and perhaps not passed. In B.C. 465 the 
same ^milius and Q. Fabius were more successful, providing for 1,000 needy 
Plebeians by their colony to Antium. In B.C. 415, and again in B.C. 392, 
small allotments were made. In B.C. 390, after the fall of Veii, an allotment 
was made of seven jugera to all who wished, in the Veientine territory. 
Eight years later, B.C. 382, 2,000 Plebeians received small allotments at 
Satricum ; and two years after this Plebeian colonies were settled at Nepete 
(in Etruria) and in the Pontine marsh district. ' 

10. But a new character was given to the struggle between the 
orders by the tribunate, which enabled the wealthier Plebeians, 

, ^ whose especial grievance was their exchision from 

Stniffffle for x c 

equal rights the chief offices in the state, to turn the efforts of 
'^TTw^or ^^^^^ order to the obtaining of equal political privi- 
Pviblilius Volero, leges, and thus to initiate a contest which lasted 
for above a century. The first step taken in advance 
was by the law of Publilius Volero (b.c. 470), the main importance 
of which was that it assumed the initiative in legislation, hitherto 
exclusively in the hands of the other order. When the attempt 
thus made to legislate in a matter of public importance succeeded, 
when, by the sanction of the Senate and Patricians, the rogatio 
Tublilia became law, the contest was virtually decided ; a door was 
opened by means of which an entrance might be effected into the 
very citadel of the constitution; all that was necessary was sufficient 
patience and perseverance, a determination in spite of all obstacles 
to press steadily forward to the required end, and to consent per- 
manently to no compromise that should seriously interfere with 
the great principle of equal rights. 

1 1. The Plebeians, victorious in this first struggle, did not long 
rest upon their oars. In b.c. 460 the tribune, C. Terentilius 
Harsa, brought forward a proposition, the real object of which was 
a complete change of the constitution. He proposed the creation 



PARTI. PEE. II.] THE FIRST DECEMVIRATE. 357 

of a board of commissioners, half Patrician and half Plebeian, 
whose duties should be to codify the existing laws. Law of 
to limit and define the authority of the consuls, and Terentilms 

■' -" Harsa 

to establish a constitution just and equitable to leads to the 

both orders. The proposition was opposed with ^^f''^]^" ^^ti 

the utmost determination and violence. Even at Decemvirs. 

the lastj it was not formally carried • but, after ten years of the most 

vehement strife, after Rome, through the contentions between 

the orders, had several times been nearly taken by the Volscians, 

and had once been actually occupied by a band of adventurers 

under a Sabine named Appius Herdonius, called in by some of the 

more violent of the Patrician body, the nobles virtually yielded — 

they agreed that that should be done which the law proposed, but 

required that it should be done in another way. The nation, 

assembled in its centuries, should freely choose the ten com- 

missionerSj to whom so important a task was to be intrusted, 

and who would, moreover, constitute a provisional government, 

superseding for the time all other magistrates. The Plebeians 

consented ; and the natural consequence was that ten Patricians 

were chosen — Patricians, however, mostly of known moderation, 

who might be expected to perform their task prudently and justly. 

13. The First Decemvirs did not disappoint the expectations 

formed of them. In their codification of the laws they did little 

but stereotype the existing practice, putting, for the Work 

most part, into a written form what had previously accomplished 

.- , , ^^ -^ by the first 

been matter of precedent and usage. In some Decemvirs. 

matters^ however, where the law was loose and ^°^^ °^ Laws. 

indeterminate, they had to give it definiteness and precision by 

expressing for the first time its provisions in writing. The code 

of the Twelve Tables — ^ fons omnts publlci pnvatlque juris ' — which 

dates from this time, was a most valuable digest of the early 

Roman law, and, even in the fragmentary state in which it has 

come down to us, deserves careful study. 

The fragments of the code have been published by several writers, as by 
Haubold in his Instiiutionum juris Romani pr'tvati Lineamenta, Lipsiae, 1826; 
and by Dirksen in his Uebersicht der bisherigen Versuche zur Kritik und Her- 
stellung des lextes der Zivolf-Tafel-Fragmente, Leipzig, 1824. The subject has 
been well treated by Arnold in his Roman History, vol. i. chap. xiv. 

13. But the main work of the Decemvirs was the constitution 
which they devised and sought to establish. In lieu of the double 
magistracy, half Patrician and half Plebeian, which had recently 



358 ROME. [BOOKV. 

divided the state, and had threatened actual disruption, the De- 
cemvirs instituted a single governmental body — a 
Constitution, board of ten, half Patrician and half Plebeian, which 
Second ^a.s to Supersede at once the consulate and the tri- 

Decemvirate. ^ , ^ ^ t\ • n->i 

bunate, and to be the sole Roman executive. The 
centuries were to elect j and the Patrician assembly was, probably, 
to confirm the election. It is suspected that the duration of the 
office was intended to exceed a year j but this is perhaps uncertain. 

14. Fairly as this constitution was intended, and really liberal 
as were its provisions, as a practical measure of relief it failed 

The second entirely. One member of the board, Appius Clau- 
- Decemvirate dius, obtained a complete ascendancy over his 
a tyranny, coUeagues, and persuaded them_, as soon as they 
B.C. 449. came into office, to appear and act as tyrants. The 
abolition of all the other high magistracies had removed those 
checks which had previously restrained consuls, tribunes, and 
even dictators ; there was now no power in the state which could 
legally interfere to prevent an abuse of authority, unless it were 
the Senate ^ and the Senate was on the whole inclined to prefer a 
tyranny, which did not greatly affect its own members, to the 
tumults and disorders of the last forty years. Rather than see the 
tribunate restored, the Patricians, and their representatives the 
senators, were prepared to bear much; and thus there was small 
hope of redress from this quarter. 

15. It was on the Plebeians that the yoke of the Decemvirs 
pressed most heavily. It was supposed that, as they had now no 

. legal mode of even making their complaints heard, 
breaks out. sincc there were no tribunes to summon the tribes 
secede for ^^ meet, they at any rate might be oppressed and 
the second insulted with absolute impunity. Accordingly^ they 
Decemvirs Were Subjected to every kind of wrong and indignity 
abdicate, — ^he Decemvirs and their partisans plundered them, 
outraged their persons, heaped contumely upon them, 
and finally attacked them in the tenderest of all points — the honour 
of their families. Then at length resistance was aroused. As 
the wrongs of Lucretia had armed the Patricians against Tarquin, 
so those of Virginia produced a rising of the Plebeians against 
Appius. The armies, which were in the field, revolted : the com- 
mons at home rose j and, when the Senate still declined to take 
any active steps against the Decemvirs, the whole mass of the 



PAET I. PER. II.] THE SECOND SECESSION. 359 

Plebeians once more occupied the Mons Sacer. The walls of a 
new city began to rise ; the Roman state was split in two j its 
foreign enemies, seeing their opportunity, assumed a threatening 
attitude ; destruction was imminent ; when at last the Senate 
yielded. Appius and his colleagues were required by a decree 
[senatusconsultum) to resign their offices, and, having now no 
physical force on which they could fall back, they submitted, and 
went through the formalities of abdication. 

16. Forced hurriedly to extemporise a government, the state fell 
back upon that form which had immediately preceded the estab- 
lishment of the First Decemvirate. It was adopted. Re-establish- 
however, with certain modifications. Prior to the ment of the 
Decemvirate for above thirty years, the Patricians tribunate 
had claimed and exercised the right of appointing by °^ ^^^ Plebs. 
their own exclusive assembly one of the two consuls. It was 
impossible at the present conjuncture to maintain so manifestly 
unfair a usurpation. The free election of both consuls was conse- 
quently restored to the centuries. The tribunate of the Plebs was 
re-established exactly as it had existed before the Decemvirate. 
But the position of the other Plebeian magistrates was improved. 
The Plebeian ' gediles ' and judges were allowed the ' sacrosanct ' 
character j and the former were made custodians of all decrees 
passed by the Senate, which it henceforth became impossible for 
the magistrates to ignore or falsify. Further, a distinct recognition 
was made of the right of the tribunes to consult the tribes on 
matters of public concern, and thus to initiate legislation — a right 
hitherto resting merely upon grounds of reason and prescription. 

The law of Valerius and Horatius, ' ut quod tributim plebs jussisset populum 
teneret^ could not at this time have meant more, than that plebiscita should be 
binding, if they received the sanction of the Senate and Curies. This is further 
rendered evident by the later history of the Publilian and Hortensian laws. 

17. In relinquishing temporarily their claim to a share in the 
supreme magistracy for the purpose of securing at any cost the 
restoration of the much- valued tribunate, the Pie- ^ . . 

Constitution 

beians were far from intending to profess themselves of b.c. 442. 
satisfied with the exclusive possession of high office shin'^su^CT-' 
by the other party. They expected, perhaps, that seded by the 

... c • • .1 i • 1 • combined 

some proposition for giving them a certain share in censorship 
the government would emanate from the Patricians ^"d. military 
themselves, who were not universally blind to the 
justice of their claims. But, as time went on and no movement 



36o ROME. [book v. 

in this direction was made, the Plebeian leaders once more took 
up the question, and in B.C. 443, C. Canuleius, one of the tri- 
bunes, brought forward two separate but connected laws, one 
opening the consulship to the Plebeian order, the other legalising 
intermarriage between Patricians and Plebeians, and providing 
that the children should follow the rank of the father. Both laws 
encountered a strenuous opposition ; and, according to one autho- 
rity, no concession was made until the Plebs once more seceded, 
this time across the Tiber to the Janiculan Hill, when the ' Inter- 
marriage Law ' {lex de connubio) was passed, and, in lieu of the other, 
a compromise was effected between the orders. It was agreed to 
put the consulate in commission, substituting for the double rule 
of two equal magistrates, which had hitherto prevailed, a board of 
(probably) five persons* of unequal rank, among whom the consular 
powers were to be parcelled out. The duties with respect to the 
revenue, and the arrangement of the roll of the Senate, of the 
knights, and of the citizens generally in the centuries, which had 
hitherto been exercised by the consuls, were separated off and made 
over to two ' Censors ' elected by the centuries from among the 
nobles only. The remaining duties of the consuls were consigned 
to three 'Military Tribunes,' also elected by the centuries, but from 
the Patricians and Plebeians indifferently. The latter officers were 
to be annual ^ the former were to hold office for a term of five years. 

It is probable that the Constitution of B.C. 442 was intended to supersede 
altogether that which preceded it, and to rule the elections year after year 
regularly. But the Patricians contrived' to throw a doubt on this intention ; 
and the practice grew up of the Senate formally determining towards the close 
of the year whether the ensuing election should be one of military tribunes 
or of consuls. In the latter case the Patricians were secure of the two seats 
without a struggle ; in the former there was danger that one or more Plebeians 
might be elected. 

] 8. The working of this constitution was extremely unsatis- 
factory to the Plebeians. By means of the irregular alternation of 
Unsatisfactory ^^^^ consulate with the military tribunate, at least 
working of this half the supreme magistracies were monopolised by 
the nobles without the Plebeians being able even to 
be candidates. With respect to the other half, it might have been 
thought that they could have avenged themelves. But practically 
it was found that only on rare occasions, under circumstances of 

* Mommsen says ' eight ' — two censors, and six military tribunes ; but there is no 
instance of a board of six military tribunes till B.C. 402, forty years later ; after which 
time there is no instance of a board containing less than six. 



PARTI. PER. II.] THE MILITARY TRIBUNATE. 361 

peculiar excitement, could the centuries be induced to elect a Ple- 
beian candidate. The Patricians by their own votes and those of 
their Clients in the centuries of the first class (see above, p. 346) 
had almost the complete control of the elections j and during nearly 
forty years, at the most three Plebeians obtained a place in the 
college. Even then their position was insecure. The colleges of 
sacred lore might be called upon to inquire whether some acciden- 
tal informality at the election had not rendered it invalid. Of the 
three Plebeian tribunes elected under the constitution of B.C. 442^ 
one was made to resign in his third montli of office, because the 
augural tent had not been pitched rightly. 

19. Nor were the Plebeians compensated for their disappoint- 
ment with respect to the constitution of b.c. 442 by mild or liberal 
treatment in other respects during the forty years 

that it lasted (b.c. 442 to 402). The dignity of the ^ent of the 
censorship was indeed lessened by the ^milian law. Plebeians in 

1 • 1 1- • • 1 1 1 ■ r ^ /— r r Othcr rCSpCCtS. 

which diminished the duration of the omce from five 
years to eighteen months j but any advantage which the Plebeians 
might seem to have gained in this respect was counterbalanced by 
the elevation of the prefect of the city, an exclusively Patrician 
officer, to the position of a colleague of the military tribunes when 
there were no censors in office. A demand which the Plebeians 
made for a share of the qusestorship was practically eluded in the way 
which had now come to be fashionable^ by throwing the office open 
to both orders. Requests for allotments of land were either wholly 
rejected, or answered by niggardly assignments of two 'jugera' to a 
man in portions of the territory very open to attack on the part of 
an enemy. The state-rents were generally withheld by the ' pos- 
sessores ; ' and, to make up the deficiency in the revenue, the 
property-tax was unduly augmented. The demand of the tribunes, 
that the soldiers should receive pay during the time that they were 
on active service, was not complied with; nor was anything done 
to alleviate the pressure caused by the high rate of interest. 

20. Thus the Plebeians, though, by the letter of the constitution, 
they had made certain not inconsiderable gains since the abolition 
of the Decemvirate, were scarcely better contented Modification 
with their position in the state than they had been ofthemilitai7 
when Terentilius or when Canuleius commenced Constitution 
their agitations. And the Patricians were quite of b.c. 402. 
aware of their feelings. Accordingly, when, about b.c. 403, the 



362 ROME. [book v. 

military position of Rome among her neighbours had become such 
as to justify the nation in entering upon a more important war 
than any hitherto waged by the Republic, and it was clear that 
success would depend very much upon the heartiness and unanimity 
with which the whole nation threw itself into the struggle, the 
Patricians themselves came forward with proposals for a change in 
the military tribunate, and probably one also in the censorship, 
which had for their object the better contentation of the other 
order. A new constitution was framed ; and at the same time 
it was agreed that the state-rents should be carefully collected, 
and from the money thus obtained regular pay should be given 
to the soldiers, who were now to be called upon to serve the 
whole, or nearly the whole, of the year. 

Constitution of B.C. 402. {a) The number of the military tribunes is 
raised from three to six, one of whom, however, is the ' prsefectus urbis,' and 
so necessarily a Patrician— perhaps even elected by the Patrician assembly. 
The other five are elected by the centuries freely from either order, {l)) The 
censorship is, like the military tribunate, thrown 'open to both orders. {/) It 
is agreed that this constitution shall operate permanently ; or, in other words, 
that the consulate shall be wholly given up, and military tribunes hold office 
every year. 

21. The wars of the Republic had hitherto been of minor import- 
ance. After the yoke of Porsenna was thrown oiBF (see above, § 6) a 

Wars of the ' ^'^^^ ^^d sharp Struggle had supervened with the 
Republic from Latins, who were compelled by Sp.Cassius (B.c.491), if 
menUo'^ " not to renew their old treaty, at any rate to enter into 
B.C. 402. g^ league, offensive and defensive, with the Romans. 
The Hernicans of the Upper Liris country were soon afterwards 
(B.C. 484) forced by the same general to join the alliance. The 
special object of the league was to resist the encroachments of the 
Oscan nations, particularly the ^Equi and Volsci, who were now at 
the height of their power. A long struggle with these nations, 
attended with very varying success, had followed. Rome had at 
times been reduced to great straits. Many Latin cities had been 
taken and occupied by the Volscians. But, after above half a cen- 
tury of almost perpetual contest, the power of the Oscans began 
to wane. The confederated Romans, Latins, and Hernicans 
recovered most of their lost ground. Tarracina was re-occupied, 
B.C. 403. At the same time, the pressure of the Sabines upon 
Rome, constant in the earlier years of the Republic, had ceased. 
A great victory, gained by the consul, Horatius, in b.c. 446, had 
relieved Rome of this enemy, whose superabundant energies found 



PART I. PER. II.] LAST WAR WITH VEIL 363 

for many years an ample scope in Southern Italy. Under these 
circumstances of comparative freedom from any pressing danger, 
Rome felt that the time was come when she might make a fresh 
start in the race for power. She was cramped for room towards the 
north and west by the near vicinity of an important but not very 
formidable state, Veii. Having first tested her adversary's strength 
in a contest for the possession of that single post which the 
Etruscans still held south of the Tiber, namely, Fidenae, and 
having after some difficulty been successful so far (b.c. 423), Rome 
proceeded in b.c. 403 to enter upon a fresh war with Veii, dis- 
tinctly intending to eflPect, if she could, a permanent conquest. 

32. The war with the Veientines, commenced in this spirit, 
lasted, according to the tradition, ten years — b.c. 403 to 392. 
Rome now for the first time maintained in the field .„ .^, ,. .. 

vv ar with Veil, 

continuously an armed force, thus laying the founda- b. c. 

tion of that ' standing army ' to which she ultimately terminates in 
owed most of her greatness. She made her attack its capture 

, ,- 1 I- r ■ ^^^ ruin. 

on the powerful Jitrascan state at a fortunate time. 

Almost contemporaneously with her first serious aggressions upon 

the southernmost city of the confederacy began that terrible inroad 

from the north which utterly shattered and broke up the Etruscan 

power in the plain of the Po, and first alarmed and then seriously 

crippled the strength of the Cis-Apennine league. Had not the 

Gallic invasion occupied the whole attention of the northern 

Etruscans, it is probable that they would have made common 

cause with the threatened Veii, in which case the war would 

scarcely have terminated as it did in the capture and ruin of the 

city. 

Details of the last War with Veii. B.C. 402 to 401. The Romans 
occupy various posts in the Veientine territory, and offer battle, which is 
declined. — B.C. 400. The siege of Veii is commenced — attempt at circum- 
vallation. The Veientines destroy the works, which are, however, restored 
late in the year, — B.C. 399. Aid brought to the Veientines by the people of 
Falerii and Capena. The Roman works are carried and the besieging army is 
driven off. — B.C. 398. Roman armies invade the territories of Falerii and 
Capena. No great impression made. — B.C. 397. Siege of Veii re-formed. — 
B.C. 396. Second attempt of the Falisci and Capenates to relieve their neigh- 
bour fails. — B.C. 394. Attempt of the people of Tarquinii equally unsuc- 
cessful. — B.C. 392. Veii stormed by Camillus. 

23. The successful issue of the war with Veii encouraged the 

Romans to fresh efforts in the same direction. Further gains 

Capena was conquered and her territory absorbed ^" Etruna. 

in the year after Veii fell. Then Falerii was attacked and forced 



-364 ROME. " [book v. 

to cede some of her lands. The neighbouring towns of Nepete 
and Sutrium submitted at the same time and became Roman 
dependencies. Finally_, war was declared against the Volsinians^ 
and the Roman arms were carried beyond the Ciminian moun- 
tains. Here victory was again with the aggressors j but the 
success failed to bring any increase of territory. 

24. But now the progress of Rome received a sudden and 
terrible check. The Gallic hordes, which had begun to swarm 

across the Alps, about b.c. 400, and had conquered 

Gauls. Northern Etruria nearly at the time when the 

Rome burnt, Romans took Veii, after a brief pause, crossed the 

B c. 387. 

Apennines, and spread like a flood over Central 
Italy. Whether Rome gave them any special provocation^ or no, 
is doubtful. At any rate, they poured down the valley of the 
Tiber in irresistible force, utterly defeated the entire armed strength 
of the Romans upon the Allia, captured the city, and burnt 
almost the whole of it, except the Capitol. The Capitol itself was 
besieged for months, but still held out, when the Gauls, weary of 
inaction and alarmed for the safety of their conquests in the plain 
of the Po, consented, on the payment of a large sum of money, 
to retire. 

It is questionable whether the destruction of Rome was so complete as 
generally alleged. The Gauls would have wished to save a portion of the 
buildings as a shelter to themselves against heat and wet. And these they 
would not have been likely to destroy at their departure under its circum- 
stances. The town would probably have contained many solid stone buildings 
calculated to resist a rapid conflagratioh. And the Capitol, with its temples 
and other public edifices, was, we know, untouched. 

The question concerning the credibility of the early Roman history depends 
to a considerable extent upon the amount of devastation committed by the 
Gauls. But it is also, in part, independent of that question, turning upon the 
further one, which of the existing monuments were likely to have been usually 
kept in the Capitol, or to have been removed to it before the siege began, 

25. It might have been expected that this fearful blow would 
have been fatal to the supremacy of Rome among the Italic 

Effect of the nations. But the result was otherwise. At first, 

^^Mnitai°^*^^" inds^^j consequences followed which brought the 

history of Republic into serious danger, and seemed to menace 

° B. c."^ ™ its existence. The Latins and Hernicans, who had 

387-355. been united in the closest possible league with the 

Romans, the former for above, the latter for not much less than 

a century, took the opportunity of Rome's defeat to declare the 

league dissolved. The Oscan nations, the Volsci especially. 



PARTI. PEE. II.] GREAT INROAD OF THE GAULS. 365 

renewed their attacks. The Etruscans took the offensive. Rome 
was saved from immediate destruction by the genius of Camillus, 
and then gradually rose again to power and preponderance by her 
own inherent energy. To account for the slightness of the check 
which the Gallic conquest gave to her external prosperity, we 
must bear in mind that the attack of the Gauls was not really 
upon Rome alone, or even upon Rome specially and peculiarly. 
The first burst of their fury had fallen on the Etruscans, and had 
permanently weakened that important people. Their later irrup- 
tions injured the Italic nations generally, not Rome in particular. 
The Umbrians, Sabines, Latins, ^Equi, and Volsci all suffered, 
perhaps about equally. Thus Rome on the whole succeeded in 
maintaining her place among the Italian states ; and^ the same 
causes which had previously given her a preponderance continuing 
to work, she gradually lifted herself up once more above her neigh- 
bours. She warred successfully with the Volscians, and with 
several cities of the Latins, which were now leagued with them. 
She held her own in Etruria. After an interval of about a gene- 
ration she induced the Latins and compelled the Hernicans to 
resume their old position of confederates (b.c. '^^^) under her 
hegemony. Within five-and-thirty years of the destruction of the 
city, Rome had fully recovered from all the effects of the blow 
dealt by the Gauls ; and, if we take into account the general 
weakness caused by the Gallic ravages, had relatively improved 
her position. 

36. While Rome thus, on the whole, prospered externally, her 
internal condition was also gradually improving. The second 
military tribunate was not, indeed, very much internal 
more successful than the first, failing equally to history, 
content the aspirations of the Plebeian order, constitution of 
Though it gave them a larger proportion of the ^•*^- '^^'^■ 

o X r Recurrence 

high offices, the proportion was still so small — not of general 
so much as one-twelfth — that their dissatisfaction, poverty. 
not unreasonably, continued. They never obtained the military 
tribunate excepting under abnormal circumstances ; and on the 
single occasion on which they gained the censorship (b.c. 376), it 
was wrested from them under a religious pretext. The Patri- 
cians could still, ordinarily, command the votes of the centuries ; 
and, if a Plebeian obtained office, it was by Patrician sufferance 
or contrivance. Excepting under peculiar circumstances, the 



366 ROME. [BOOK v. 

nobles were inclined to grasp as much power as they could ; and 
hence the Plebeians felt that they had no firm hold on the consti- 
tution, no security for the continuance of even that small share 
of office which had practically fallen to them. They would pro- 
bably have set themselves to obtain a change in the constitution 
many years before the Licinio-Sextian laws were actually brought 
forward, had not the Gallic invasion produced such an extent of 
poverty and debt as effectually cramped for a time all Plebeian 
aspirations, changing the struggle for equal rights into a struggle 
for existence. 

Causes of the general Poverty at this perjod. (a) Loss of property — 
farm buildings, implements, crops, cattle, even seed-corn— in consequence of 
the Gallic inroad. (^) Necessity of borrowing money in order to rebuild the 
demolished houses and re-stock the plundered farms, (c) High rate of 
interest, owing to the necessary suspension of the Decemviral enactment. 
{cT) Probable forfeiture of the security given to the State for the completion 
of the houses in a year. {/) Rise in the amount of property-tax, owing partly 
to the number of public buildings which required to be rebuilt or repaired, 
and partly to the non-payment of the State-rents. (/") Difficulty of providing 
allotments at a time when Rome was not making much advance territorially. 

The second item might have been in great part spared, if Rome had been 
deserted and its population had removed to Veil, But the moral grounds 
against such a transfer of the capital far outweighed all the material ones in 
its favour. 

27. The first important result of the general prevalency of 
distress among the Plebeians was the attempt of M. Manlius. 

Affair f ^^^^ P^"^^ ^^^ disinterested than his prototype, 
M. Manlius, Spurius Cassius, he made the Plebeian wrongs the 
^'^' ' stalking-horse of his, own ambition. Partly tempted, 
partly goaded into crime, he is entitled to our pity even though we 
condemn him. His intentions were probably at the first honest, 
and the means that he designed to use legal j but the opposi- 
tion which he encountered drove him to desperate measures, and he 
became in the end a dangerous conspirator. Well would it have 
been for Rome had she possessed a method, like that which Athens 
enjoyed in the Ostracism, of securing her own liberties by the 
temporary banishment, rather than the death, of a great citizen ! 

28. During the Manlian struggle, and immediately after it, 
some slight efforts were made by the government to relieve the 

Slight general destitution. In b.c. 382 two thousand 

reliwe^ Ae Plebeians received allotments of two and a-half 

poverty. jugera at Satricum. Two years later, colonies 

were sent out to Nepete in Etruria and to the Pontine marsh 

district. But these were mere palliatives, and in no way met or 



PART I. PEE. II.] LEGISLATION OF LICINIUS. 367 

grappled with the disease. It was necessary, if the bulk of the 
Plebeian order was not to be swept away from the state, becoming 
the slaves of the Patricians or of foreigners, that measures should 
be taken on a large scale, both to meet the present distress, and to 
prevent such crises from recurring. 

39. Great difficulties call for, and seem in a way to produce, 
great men. Fourteen years after the distress had become con- 
siderable owing to the Gallic inroad, two Plebeians 
of high rank and great ability, C. Licinius Stolo and scheme of 
L. Sextius, came forward with a scheme of lep;is- Lidmus and 
lation, skilfully framed so as to cover all the various 
heads of Plebeian grievance, and to provide, at once, a remedy for 
the actually existing evils, and security against future oppression. 
Considering that there were two kinds of evil to remedy, political 
inequality and want, they framed their measures against both. 
For the immediate relief of the needy, they brought forward their 
' lex de are alleno^ which provided that whatever had been paid on 
any debt in the way of interest should be counted as a repayment 
of the principal and deducted from the amount due ; and that the 
balance remaining, if any, should be demandable only in instal- 
ments, which should be spread over the space of three years. 
For the prevention of the poverty in future, they proposed their ' lex 
agrarta ' — which, in the first place, threw open the right of occu- 
pying the public land to the Plebeians ; in the second, affixed a 
limit beyond which occupation should not be carried; and in 
the third, required all occupiers to employ in the cultivation of 
their farms a certain definite proportion of free labour. For the 
establishment of the principle of political equality, they proposed 
the restoration of the consulship with the proviso that one of the 
two consuls should each year be a Plebeian [lex de consulatu) ; and 
the equal division of a sacred office, that of the keepers of the 
Sibylline books, between the two orders {lex de decemvirh sacrorum). 

30. The importance of these laws was immense. They estab- 
lished fully the principle of the equality of the two , 

J 11 1 1 , • ., /v- Importance 

orders, both as respected sacred and civil office — a of the 
principle which, once admitted, was sure to work Licmio-Sextian 

. ' legislation. 

itself out to the full in course of time. They greatly Its acceptance, 
alleviated the existing poverty, and by the two ^•^•^^'^^ 
provisions for extending the right of occupation to Plebeians, and 
compelling the employment of a large amount of free labour on 



368 ROME. [BOOKV. 

the public lands, they made considerable provision against extreme 
poverty in the future. Above all, they secured to the Plebeians a 
succession of champions in the highest offices of the State, who 
would watch over their interests and protect them against unfair 
treatment. Naturally, therefore^ being so important_, the laws were 
opposed with the utmost determination by the other order. The 
struggle, according to some authorities, was of eleven years' dura- 
tion. It was probably not until a ' secession ' had begun, or at 
any rate was threatened, that the Patricians yielded — the laws 
received the sanction of both the Senate and the Assembly of the 
nobles — and a Plebeian consul, L. Sextius, was elected, e.g. '^6'3^. 

Two new offices arose in connection with the Licinio-Sextian legislation — 
the Praetorship (exclusively Patrician) and the Curule ^Edileship (alternately- 
Patrician and Plebeian). The Praetorship is perhaps best viewed as an office 
formed by detaching from the rest some of the old consular powers, and so 
as a sort of compensation to the Patricians for their loss of one consulship. 
(Compare the origin of the Censorship.) The Curule jEdileship was probably 
an old office newly arranged — the Patrician vEdileship being new-cast, because 
of the admission of the Plebeians into the nation. 

31. It might have seemed that the struggle between the orders 

would now have come to a close — that when the highest civil, and 

^. - one of the highest religious, offices had been once 

Time of re- " o j 

action. Opened to the Plebeian order, there remained no- 
SextianTon- thing which the other order could regard as worth 
stitution set fighting for. But the fact was otherwise. Not only 
were there, now as ever, among the Patricians those 
who would not yield without a. struggle even the last ^rag of 
privilege ;' but there existed in the body at this time a party 
disinclined to view the recent defeat as decisive, or to accept it as 
final. During the quarter of a century which followed on the 
passage of the Licinio-Sextian laws, it was uncertain whether or 
no the Plebeian advance could be maintained. A certain amount 
of reaction set in. For the space of fourteen years — from b.c. '^^i 
to B.C. 339 — the regular operation of the Licinio-Sextian constitu- 
tion was set aside. Instead of Plebeian consuls following each 
other in regular succession year after year, the Fasti show during 
the fourteen years seven Plebeian names only, while there are 
twenty-one Patrician. 

It is uncertain by what means this illegal system was introduced or main- 
tained ; but there are grounds for suspecting that it was very mainly through 
the defection of a portion of the Plebeian nobility from the cause of their 
order. Four Plebeians, C. Marcius Rutilus, M. PopiUius Lasrias, C. Poetelius, 
and C. Plautius seem to have become Patrician partisans, and as a reward for 



PABTi. PEE.ii.] LICINIAN CONSTITUTION INFRINGED. 369 

their services to have received through the influence of the Patricians an 
accumulation of high offices. These men and their party among the Plebeians 
connived at the Patrician usurpations, vi'hich were the less sensibly felt by the 
mass of the Order, as they affected directly only the interests of the compara- 
tively few wealthy families. 

32. The illegal setting aside of the Licinio-Sextian constitution 
could not fail to produce among the more prudent and far-seeing 
of the Plebeians violent discontent. If a party in Discontent of 
the State is once allowed to begin the practice of the Plebeians, 
setting the law at nought, there is no saying where it will stop. 
The old champions of the Plebeian cause — the Licinii, Genucii, 
Publilii, &c. — must have been violently angered j and as time went 
on and the illegality continued, the bulk of the Order must have 
become more and more disgusted with their own renegades and 
with the Patrician usurpers. These last must have felt, during 
the whole time of the usurpation, that they walked upon a hidden 
volcano — that a fire might at any moment burst forth which would 
imperil the very existence of the community. 

33. It was probably with the view of pacifying and soothing 
the discontented, that the Patricians granted during this interval 
many boons to the poorer classes. The re-establish- 

ment of the uncial rate of interest (10 per cent.) taken to keep 
in B.C. q'^i, and the subsequent reduction of the rate ,4°^" *^^ 

^ discontent. 

by one half in B.C. 344, were popular measures, 
evidently designed to gratify the lower orders. The tax on the 
manumission of slaves (b.c. 354) would also please them, since it 
would fall wholly upon the wealthy. Of a still more popular 
character were the general liquidation of debts, in b.c. 349, by 
means of a Commission empowered to make advances from the 
treasury to all needy persons who could offer a fair security ; and 
the suspension of the property-tax, and spread of the debts over 
the space of three years, which were among the measures of relief 
adopted in b.c. 344. The practical opening to the Plebeians with- 
out a struggle of the civil offices parallel with the Consulate — the 
Dictatorship and the Mastership of the Knights (b.c. '3^^'^ — may 
also be regarded as among the politic concessions of this period, 
made for the sake of keeping the Plebeians in good humour, and 
preventing an outbreak. 

34. But, though these boons and blandishments effected some- 
thing, it was felt nevertheless that the state of affairs was 
unsettled, and that, on the occurrence of any convenient 

Bb 



37° ROME, [book Vo 

opportunity, there would probably be a rising. Accordingly the 

government determined, so far as in it lay, to avoid 

outbreak furnishing an opportunity; and hence, for almost 

produces a the first time in the history of the Roman State, we 
peace policy. 

find a policy of peace adopted and steadily main- 
tained for a series of years. Between the years b.c. 355 and 347, 
treaties of peace were concluded with all the important powers of 
Central Italy ; and Rome left herself no enemy against whom she 
could legitimately commence a war excepting the shattered rem- 
nants of the Oscan nations and perhaps the Sabines of the tract 
beyond the Anio. 

Peace and alliance were made with the Latins, B.C. 355 ; with the Herni- 
cans in the same year; with the Samnites, B.C. 351; with Caere, B.C. 350; 
with Tarquinii and Falerii, in B.C. 348. It is not impossible that a treaty was 
made with the Gauls after the campaign of B.C. 346, after which they are 
never again found in Latium. A commercial treaty with the Carthaginians 
was made in B.C. 345 ; but this would not belong to the 'peace policy' here 
spoken of, since there was at this time no possibility of a war with Carthage. 

'^^. At length, in B.C. 340, twelve, years after the Licinio- 
Sextian constitution had been set aside, an occasion offered, which 
The peace tempted the government to depart from its peace 
policy policy, and to run the risk of internal trouble which 
War with was well known to be implied in the commence- 
Samnium. nient of a great and important war. The temptation, 
one which it was impossible to resist, was the offer of the Cam- 
panians to become Roman subject-allies, if Rome would protect 
them against the Samnites. To accept this offer was to more 
than double the Roman territory; to reject it was greatly to 
strengthen the Samnites, already the chief power of the south of 
Italy. The government, which though Patrician, was still Roman, 
was too patriotic to hesitate. Campania was therefore received 
into alliance, and the First Samnite War was the immediate conse- 
quence. 

^6. The military operations of the war will be described in the 
next portion of this Book (Per. Ill, § 3) ; but its effect on the 
Mutiny of civil history is too closely connected with the period 
the soldiers. Qf ^hich we are now treating to admit of separation 
from it. The Roman army, having carried on a successful cam- 
paign, wintered in Campania; and the soldier-citizens, having 
thus had an opportunity of consulting together, determined to 
mutiny. Some were for a ' secession ' to Capua, but the majority 
were for enforcing their will upon the usurping government at 



PARTI. PEE. III.] LAWS OF GENUCIUS. 371 

Rome. In vain the consuls, perceiving what was afloat, tried to 

disperse the army little by little before an outbreak should come. 

Their intention was perceived^ and the mutiny took place at once. 

The army marched upon Rome and made its demands — the 

government met it with a hasty levy, but these troops refused to 

fight. Long negociations followed. At length, a tribune of the 

Plebs, a Genucius, proposed and carried through a series of laws, 

which were accepted on both sides as terms of reconciliation. 

The Licinian constitution was practically re-estab- Restoration 

lished j but it was enacted, as a just penalty on the of the 

Patricians for their repeated usurpation of both constitution 

consulships, that, though both consuls might never ^'^^ passing of 
1 11 1 -r. • ■ -1 111 11 I , r- 1 1 the Genucian 

legally be Patricians, it should be allowable for both laws, 

of them to be Plebeians. To prevent any future ®' ^- ^^®- 

seduction of a Plebeian party by the temptation of accumulated 

offices, it was enacted that no Plebeian should henceforth hold the 

same office twice within ten years, or two offices in the same year. 

To alleviate the remaining pressure of debt, there was an absolute 

abolition of all outstanding claims, and a law was passed making 

the lending of money upon interest illegal. Some military 

grievances were at the same time redressed, provision being made 

that no soldier should be dismissed the service without cause 

shown, and that no petty officer should be degraded to the ranks. 

On these conditions peace was re-established j and domestic 

tranquillity being attained, Rome was once more ready to devote 

her whole strength to the forwarding of her interests abroad. 

For a full account of this interesting period of Roman history, see an article 
contributed by the present writer to the Oxford and Cambridge Re'view for 
April, 1846 ; pp. 241-257. 



THIRD PERIOD. 

History of Rome from the breaking out of the First Samnite War, B.C. 340, 
to the Commencement of the Wars with Carthage, B.C. 264. 

Sources, (a) Authors. LiVY and DiODORUS are the chief authorities for 
the earlier portion of this period ; but the latter writer fails us after B.C. 302, 
The fragments of Appian's Samnitica are of some value. For the war with 
Pyrrhus, Plutarch's Life of that hero is the main source ; but his narrative 
must be supplemented from the fragments of Dio Gassius, Dionysius, and 
Appian, and from the continuous narratives of Justin, Orosius, and 
ZoNARAS. For the period following the departure of Pyrrhus from Italy 
(B.C. 275 to 264) these latter writers are almost our sole authorities. We 

B b 2 



372 ROME. [BOOK V. 

may consult however with advantage the Epitomes of LiVY and the brief 
abstract of Florus. {h) Inscriptions. The Fasti Capitolini are full and 
tolerably continuous for the greater portion of this period. There belong 
also to it a certain number of sepulchral and other inscriptions, which will be 
found in — 

Orelli, J. C, Inscriptionum Latinarum selectarum amplissima collectio. 
Turici, 1828; 2 vols. 8vo. ; and in 

MOMMSEN, Th., Inscriptiones LatincB antiquissimcB ad CcBsaris mortem. 
Berolini, 1863 ; folio. 

The modern writers best worth consulting on this period are those already 
mentioned {supra, p. 251) as authorities on the history of Period II. 

1. The Third Period of Roman History is that of the great 

wars in Italy, whereby Rome succeeded in making herself mistress 

External ^^ *^^ entire Peninsula proper. It comprises the 

history of four Samnite Wars, the great Latin War, the war 

chiefly ' with Pyrrhus, a war with the Gauls, and several 

important, minor wars terminating in the conquest of the other 

lesser Italian nations. The external history of the period is thus 

of the highest interest ; while the internal history is, comparatively 

speaking, scanty and unimportant. 

3. When Rome determined to accept the Campanians as subject- 
allies, she broke her treaty with Samnium, and practically made 
First war of ^ declaration of war. Campania was a Samnite 
Rome dependency which had revolted, and which the Sam- 

with Samnium, . "', ,.._,,. 

B.C. nites were bent on subjugating. Ihe interposition 

340-338. Qf Rome in the quarrel resembled that of Athens in 
the contest between Corinth and Corcyra [supra^ p. 176). Morally, 
it could not be justified j but, as a matter of policy, it could not 
be impugned. Rome already saw that her most formidable Italian 
rival was Samnium, and that it was with Samnium she would have 
to contend for the first place in Italy. A step which at once 
strengthened herself and weakened her antagonist could not but 
be expedient j and we cannot be surprised that, despite its injustice, 
the step was taken. 

Details of the War. — B.C. 340. Rome sends two consular armies into 
Campania, one of which enters Samnium from the west, while the Latins invade 
the country of the Peligni and threaten Samnium on the north. The Roman 
invading army gets into difficulties, but is extricated by the courage and 
conduct of a Decius. The Latins make no serious impression. The other 
Roman army, however, which remains in Campania, gains two victories, one 
at Mount Gaurus, near Naples, and the other at Suessula. Both Roman armies 
winter in Campania. — B.C. 339. Mutiny of the Roman troops. The whole 
management of the war is left to the Latins, who carry it on successfully, 
protecting Campania, and more than once defeating the Samnites.^ — B.C. 338. 
The Romans and Latins invade Samnium separately. Rome, perceiving that 
Latium has assumed an independent attitude, hastily makes peace with the 
Samnites, and determines to attempt the subjugation of Latium. 



PAKT I. PEE. III.] GREAT LATIN WAR. 373 

3. Rome, about to engage in a war for supremacy with Latium, 
strengthened herself by an alliance with the knot of Sabine com- 
munities known as ' the Marsian League.' Latium 

obtained the adhesion of the Campanians, Sidici- Latin War, 
nians, and Volscians. Samnium was an active ally „^-f- 

' ^ 337-335. 

to neither party, but took the opportunity, which the 
contest offered, to advance her frontier on the side of the Volscian 
territory. The struggle between the two main belligerents was 
begun and concluded within the space of three years, and, indeed, 
was virtually decided by the events of the first campaign. The 
battles of Vesuvius and Trifanum (b.c. 337) were stoutly con- 
tested by the Latins, but nevertheless were very decided Roman 
victories. Their effect was to break up the confederacy. Many 
states at once submitted. Others continued a desultory and 
ineffectual resistance j but by the end of b.c. 'i^'^^^ the last Latin 
town had made its submission j and Rome, having effected the 
conquest, proceeded to the work of pacification. 

Pacification of Latium. The principles of the pacification were isolation 
and separation of interests. The federal meetings at the lucus Ferentinus were 
of course abolished. The rights of intermarriage between the citizens of the 
different states, and of holding lands in each others' territories, were suspended. 
Some cities, as Velitrse and Antium, were occupied by Roman colonies. Others, 
as Tibur and Praeneste, forfeited a large portion of their territory. One town, 
Tusculum, was simply restored to its former condition of a Reman ' munici- 
pium.' The same position was assigned to Aricia, Momentum, and Pedum. 
Lanuvium was received into full citizenship. Laurentum, which had taken 
no part in the war, was allowed a nominal independence. 

4. The conclusion of the great struggle with Latium is followed 
by a pause of twelve years, during which Rome undertook nothing 
but trivial and unimportant wars, and those chiefly pause of 
wars which were forced upon her. Her action was twelve years' 

. duration, 

paralyzed by two causes, one internal, the other b.c. 

external. Her internal danger was from the sub- 335-323. 
jected Latins, who were known to be discontented with their 
treatment, and might be expected to revolt the moment Rome 
should enter upon any important contest. The external cause of 
alarm was the invasion of Alexander of Epirus, uncle of Alexander 
the Great, who landed in Italy, e.g. 331, at the invitation of the 
Tarentines. Alexander's quarrel was mainly with the Samnites 
and their dependent allies ; but, if he had been successful against 
them, he would probably have attempted the conquest of Italy. 
Rome, doubtful of the result, protected herself by a treaty with 



374 ROME. [book v. 

the invader, and then nursed her strength and prepared herself to 

resist him if he should attack her. 

Minor Wars of this Period. In B.C. 333 and 332 Rome attacks and 
reduces the Ausonians. The year after their reduction, she makes war on the 
Sidicini. In B.C. 327 Privernum and Fundi revolt under Vitruvius Vaccus. 
Fundi speedily submits. Privernum is reduced, B.C. 326. In the same year 
an attack of the Gauls is met and repulsed, 

5. The reverses which befel Alexander of Epirus, about 
B.C. '^t'^S-i encouraged the Romans to resume their old policy of 

. . , aggression, and to take steps which led naturally and 

Aggressions of °^ 3 r / 

Rome upon almost necessarily to the renewal of the struggle 
amnium. ^|^j^ Samnium. By founding the colony of Fregellae 
on land conquered by the Samnites from the Volscians, a challenge 
was flung down to Samnium^ which she could scarcely refuse to 
take up. This was followed by an attack on Palseopolis, an inde- 
pendent Greek city, which had long been under Samnite protec- 
tion. War ensued as a matter of course. The time had, in fact, 
come when Rome was prepared to contest, with the power which 
she recognised as her great rival, the mastery of Southern Italy. 
Mistress of Latium and Campania, and secured by treaties from 
any early Etruscan attack, she felt herself equal to a vast effort j 
and she therefore determined to seize the occasion for a war which 
should decide whether the hegemony of the • peninsula, or at any 
rate of its southern portion, should belong to herself or to the 
Samnites. 

6. The Second Samnite War— ^the duel between the two chief 
races of Italy — covered a space of twenty-one years, from b.c. o^I's^ 

Second War ^^ ?>'^?>'i inclusive. It divides itself naturally into three 

with portions. During the first, from b.c. 'i^i^t ^o 319, 

B.C. ' the war languished, neither party apparently putting 

323-303. forth its full strength. During the second, from 

B.C. 319 to 312, the issue was really determined by the three 

great battles, of the Caudine Forks, of Lautulae, and of Cinna. 

The third period, from b.c. 313 to 303, was again one of languid 

hostilities, the war being unduly spun out, partly by the stubborn 

resistance of the beaten party, partly through the desultory attacks 

which were made upon Rome during these years by various 

enemies. 

Details of the War. First Period, B.C. 323 to 319. Rome obtains allies 
among the Lucanians and Apulians, and prepares to attack Samnium from 
the south; but the Samnites crush the Roman party in Lucania, B.C. 323. 
Rome then makes war on the Vestini and the other members of the Marsian 



PART I. PER. III.] SECOND SAMNITE WAR. 375 

League, defeats them and establishes a line of communication with Apulia 
through their territories, B.C. 322. The next year the war is transferred into 
Apulia, with such effect that in B.C. 320 the Samnites make proposals for 
peace. These, however, are rejected, and the war continues. Second Period, 
B.C. 319 to 312, The great victory of the Caudine Forks is gained by 
C. Pontius, B.C. 319. Half the Roman army is destroyed. The rest 
surrenders, but is released from captivity, on the signature of a peace by the 
consuls and two tribunes of the Plebs. The authorities, however, having 
recovered their men, refuse to be bound by the treaty, which they declare 
informal. The war continues without any very important event till the year 
B.C. 313, when the battle of Lautute is fought. This is a second great 
Samnite victory, and seems to promise them complete success in the war. 
Campania revolts from Rome. The Ausonians join the Samnites. The 
Volscians of Sora go over to them, massacring the Roman colonists. 
Luceria, one of the chief towns of Apulia, deserts the Roman alliance. There 
is a general expectation that the Samnites are going to carry all before them, 
and a wide-spread defection from the Roman cause. But in the ensuing year 
all is reversed. By a vast effort Rome succeeds in bringing into the field an 
army larger and better appointed than that which had been lost ; the Samnites 
are once more met in the field ; and the Romans gain the victory of Cinna, 
defeating their enemy with such loss that there is no after-recovery from 
the blow. Third Period, B.C. 311 to 303. The Romans carry the war into 
Samnium, which they ravage year after year. Only two battles of any 
importance are fought. In B.C. 308 the Samnites make a last effort, defeat 
the Romans under C. Marcius Rutilus, but are in their turn defeated by 
L. Papirius Cursor. The war is prolonged in consequence of the efforts 
which are made to help Samnium by other powers, as by the Etruscans, in 
B.C. 309 and 308; by the Umbrians, in the latter year; by the Marsi and 
Pehgni, in B.C. 307; by the Sallentini, in B.C. 306; and by the iEqui and 
Hernici, in B.C. 305. Could the efforts of these various nations have been 
concentrated into one great attack, Rome, if she had not succumbed, might 
have received a serious check. But the want of union among her foes gave 
her an easy triumph: every attack was repulsed; and in the year B.C. 303, 
Samnium, in despair, submitted, becoming politically subject to the Romans, 
but retaining its internal independence. 

7. The Second Samnite War brought the disaffection of the 

Latins very rapidly to a head. In b.c. 332, the second year of the 

war, there was beyond a doubt a great Latin revolt. Revolt 

Tusculum, Velitrae, and Privernum, three of the and final 

, . , , , . Ill 1 pacification 

Cities which had experienced the harshest treatment, of Latium, 
took the lead. A night attack seems to have been ^- ^- ^'^'^• 
made on Rome, and great alarm caused. The Roman govern- 
ment, however, met the danger with its usual wisdom. While 
some recommended measures of extreme violence, the Senate 
adopted a policy of conciliation. Terms were made with the 
rebels, some of whom were given, others promised, full citizenship. 
The discontented part of Latium was, in fact, incorporated into 
Rome. To mark the completeness and reality of the union, 
L. Fulvius, the leader of the revolt^ became consul for the year, 
B.C. 321. Henceforth Latium was satisfied with its position, and 
continued faithful through all the later troubles and rebellions. 



-376 ROME. [BOOK v. 

8. An interval of five years only — b.c. 303 to 298 — separates 
the Second from the Third Samnite War. Rome utilised it by 

Interval completely reducing the remnant of the vEquian 

between people, by bringing the four nations forming the 

Third Marsian League into the position of her subject- 

^''"''i^c^^''' allies, by making alliances with the Frentani and 

303-298. Picentini, and by seizing and occupying the strong 

position of Nequinum (Narnia) in Umbria. She also during this 

period sent aid to the Lucanians^ who were attacked by Cleony- 

■mus of Sparta. Samnium probably negotiated, during the pause, 

with the Etruscans, Umbrians, and Gauls, taking steps towards 

the formation of that ' League of Italy ' which she brought to 

bear against Rome in the ensuing war. 

9. The Third Samnite War is the contest of confederated 
Italy against the terrible enemy whose greatness was now seen to 

threaten every power in the peninsula. Its turning- 
Samnite War. point, which Well deserves its place among the ten 
General or twelve ' Decisive Battles of the World ' was the 
battle of Sentinum. After two years of compara- 
tively petty warfare, Samnium, in b.c. 296, brought the projected 
alliance to bear. Gellius Egnatius marched, with the flower of the 
Samnite force, across Central Italy into Etruria. The Gauls and 
Umbrians joined; and in b.c. 395, the confederate army of the 
four nations advanced upon Rome, which appeared to be on the 
brink of destruction. But a bold step taken by the Romans saved 
them. Instead of standing merely on the defensive, they met the 
invaders with one army under the consuls Fabius and Decius, 
while they marched another into the heart of Etruria. On hearing 
this, the selfish Etruscans, deserting their confederates, drew oft" 
to protect their own country. The Samnites and Gauls retired 
Battle of across the Apennines to Sentinum, losing the 
Sentinum. XJmbrians on the way, who remained to protect 
their own towns. Rome followed the retreating force, and after a 
desperate struggle defeated it, thus really deciding the war. The 
confederation was broken up. The Gauls took no further part in 
the contest. Rome carried it on separately with Etruria on the 
one side and Samnium on the other, till the exhaustion of both 
powers compelled them to make peace. Samnium was forced to 
submit unconditionally, was mulcted in a portion of its territory, 
and became a subject-ally of Rome. 



PART I. PER. III.] THIRD SAMNITE WAR. 377 

Details of the "War. First Period, B.C. 298 to 297. The Samnites, 
B.C. 298, form alliances with the Lucanians and Apulians. Roman armies 
invade Etruria and Samnium, defeat the Etruscans at Volaterra, and take 
Bovianum and Aufidena in Northern Samnium. — B.C. 297. Fabius defeats the 
Samnites and Decius the Apulians. Lucania compelled to submit to Rome. 
Second Period, B.C. 296 to 295. Gellius Egnatius marches into Etruria. 
— B.C. 296, The whole Roman force being collected to meet him, Samnium 
invades Campania, which, however, Rome recovers towards the close of the 
year. — B.C. 295. The Gauls and Umbrians join the Etruscans and Samnites. 
Advance of the allied army. Destruction of a Roman legion at Clusium, 
Romans invade Etruria. Allies retreat. Battle of Sentinum. The Gauls with- 
draw from the alliance. Third Period, B.C. 294 to 290. War carried on 
by the Romans separately in Etruria and Samnium. Desperate resistance of 
the Samnites. Great effort made in B.C. 292. Defeat of Fabius Gurges by 
C. Pontius, followed by the defeat and capture of Pontius by Fabius Maximus. 
Pontius led in triumph and put to death, B.C. 291. The Samnites submit, 
B.C. 290. 

10. Ten years intervened between the close of the Third Sam- 
nite War and the commencement of the next great struggle in 
which Rome was engaged. Much obscurity rests interval 
upon this interval, in which we lose the guidance of between the 
Livy without obtaining that of Plutarch. It appears, samnite War 
however, that shortly after the close of the Third and the war 

, with Pyrrhus 

Samnite War troubles broke out afresh in Southern b. c. 

Italy in consequence of a war between the Luca- 290-28O. 
nians and the Greeks of Thurii, b.c. :z88. Rome interfered to 
protect Thurii, whereupon the Lucanians effected a union against 
Rome of the Gauls (Senones), Etruscans, Umbrians, Samnites, 
Lucanians, Bruttians, and Tarentines, which, in the year b.c. 283, 
menaced the Republic with destruction. But, though brought 
into serious danger, Rome triumphed over her difficulties. Fabri- 
cius defeated the combined Lucanians and Bruttians, relieved 
Thurii, and received the submission of almost all the Greek towns 
of the neighbourhood except Tarentum. Dolabella avenged on 
the Senonian Gauls the defeat of Metellus at Arretium, by seiz- 
ing their country and driving them beyond its borders. The 
Etruscans, and their allies, the Boii (Gauls) were defeated with 
great slaughter at Lake Vadimon. Tarentum alone remained 
unpunished. It was probably to inflict damage on this covert 
enemy, with whom as yet there had been no actual contest, that 
a Roman fleet was sent in b.c. 282, contrary to the terms of an 
existing treaty, to cruise round the heel of Italy. This fleet having 
been attacked and sunk by the Tarentines, who also took posses- 
sion of Thurii, Rome in b.c. 281 declared war against Tarentum, 
which, accustomed to lean on Greece for support, invited over the 



378 ROME. [book v. 

Epirote prince, Pyrrhus, who had already made himself a name by 
his victory over Demetrius Poliorcetes, and his first brief reign 
over Macedonia. (See above, p. 358.) 

II. The War with Pyrrhus lasted six years, from B.C. 380 to 

274. It was the first trial of strength between Macedonized 

Greece and Rome. Pyrrhus brought with him into 

with Pyrrhus, Italy an army of 23,500 foot and 3,000 horse, dis- 

^•^- ciplined in the Macedonian fashion, and also 20 ele- 

280-274. ^ ' 

phants. At the outset he obtained no troops from 
any Italians but the Tarentines, whose services were almost 
worthless. Nevertheless, in his first battle on the Siris, though 
with an army inferior in number, he completely defeated the 
Romans, chiefly by the help of his elephants, which disconcerted 
the Roman cavalry. All Lower Italy then joined him^ and, in 
the remainder of the contest, he had the assistance of the Italian 
Greeks generally, of the Lucanians, the Bruttians, and, above all, 
the Samnites. But neither after his first victory, near Heracleia, 
nor after his second, at Ausculum (Ascoli), was he able to effect 
anything. The battles which he gained were stoutly contested, 
and cost him, each of them, several thousands of men, whom he 
could not replace and could ill spare. His power necessarily 
waned as time went on. His allies, except the Samnites, were of 
little value. His Greek troops harmonised ill with the Italians. 
Above all, while he fought for glory, the Romans fought for their 
existence ; and their patriotism and patient courage proved more 
than a match for the gallantry and brilliant strategy of their oppo- 
nent. It was as much from disgust at his ill success, so far as the 
general ends of the war were concerned, as from the attraction of 
a tempting offer, that Pyrrhus, in B.C. 278, quitted Italy for Sicily, 
accepted the Protectorate of the Greeks, and engaged in a war 
with the Carthaginians which threw them on the Roman side. 
Successful in this quarter to a certain extent, but, with his usual 
restlessness, leaving his conquest uncompleted, the Epirote prince 
returned to Italy with difficulty ; and, having lost Sicily almost at 
the moment of his departure, engaged the Romans in a third 
battle near Beneventum, and being there completely defeated, 
gave up the war, and returned with the almost entire loss of his 
army, but with heightened reputation, to his native country. 

Chronology of the "War. Pyrrhus lands in Italy early in B.C. 280. 
Defeats Laevinus near Heracleia in the autumn of the same year. Attempt to 



I 



PART I. PER. III.] WAR WITH PYRRHUS. 379 

conclude peace fails. Advance of Pyrrhus into Apulia, B.C. 279. Battle of 
Ausculum. Pyrrhus invited into Sicily. Second attempt at a peace, B.C. 278. 
Pyrrhus, leaving garrisons in Tarentum and Locri, sails to Syracuse. The 
Romans recover all Southern Italy except Tarentum. Return of Pyrrhus 
from Sicily, B.C. 276, Battle of Beneventum. Pyrrhus quits Italy. 

12. The departure of Pyrrhus was followed rapidly by the com- 
plete subjugation of Southern Italy. Tarentum surrendered b.c. 272. 
Lucania and Bruttium submitted in the same year. Consolidation 
Rheffium was stormed, b.c. 270. In Samnium a of the Roman 

f ... power in 

guerilla warfare was maintained till b.c. 269, when peninsular 
resistance finally ceased. The Sallentines and g^/' 

Messapians were conquered in b.c. 266. At the 276-265. 
same time Rome extended and consolidated her power in the 
north. A quarrel was picked with Picenum in b.c. 268. War and 
subjection followed ; and, to prevent future resistance, half the 
nation was torn from its native land and transplanted to the 
opposite coast, where it received settlements on the Gulf of 
Salernum. In b.c. 266, Umbria was forced to make its submis- 
sion ^ and in the year following, Volsinii, the chief of the Etruscan 
towns, was besieged, taken, and razed to the ground. At the 
close of the year b. c. 265, Rome reigned supreme over the length 
and breadth of Italy, from the Macra to Tarentum and Rhegium. 

13. The chief means by which Rome established and secured 
her power was her system of colonies, with its supplement, her 
military roads. The foundation of colonies began. System of 

if we may believe the Roman historians, under the colonies. 
kings. At any rate it is certain, that early in the struggle between 
the combined Romans, Latins, and Hernici on the one hand and the 
Oscan nations on the other, the plan of establishing colonies, as 
garrisons, in towns taken from the enemy, was very widely adopted. 
Such colonies were made up, in equal or nearly equal proportions, 
of citizens of the three nations, who together formed the burgher 
or Patrician body in the city where they took up their abode, 
the previous inhabitants counting only as a ^ Plebs.' The system, 
thus employed by Rome in conjunction with her allies, was after- 
wards made use of copiously in the conquests which she effected 
for her own sole advantage. As Terminus advanced, either 
colonies of Roman citizens {colonize civium Romanorum)^ who 
retained all their civic rights, or ' Latin colonies ' {colonize Latins), 
consisting of Romans who by becoming colonists lost their rights 
of voting in the Roman ' comitia ' and of aspiring to honours [jus 



38o ROME. [book v. 

suffragn et homrum)^ but retained the rest of their citizenship, were 
planted far and wide over Italy. These colonists, being Romans, 
having many Roman rights, and being planted in an invidious 
position among aliens, naturally clung to the mother-city, and 
were the great bulwarks of Roman power throughout the pen- 
insula. 

The following places are said to have been founded as colonies under the 
kings : — Antemnse and Crustumerium, ascribed to Romulus ; Ostia, to Ancus ; 
Signia and Circeii, to Tarquinius Superbus. Among the joint colonies of the 
Romans, Latins, and Hernici, were probably Signia, founded B.C. 493 ; 
Velitrae, founded B.C. 492; Norba, founded B.C. 490; Cora and Suessa 
Pometia, founded probably about the same time ; Antium, founded B.C. 465, 
afterwards recovered by the Volscians; Ardea, founded B.C. 439; Lavici, 
founded B.C. 415; Circeii, re-founded B.C. 391 ; Vitellia, founded before 
B.C. 390; Satricum, founded B.C. 382; and Setia, founded B.C. 379, 
strengthened B.C. 376. Among Roman colonies, mostly, however, with 
Latin rights, were Sutrium, founded about B.C. 383; Nepete, founded 
B.C. 380; Antium, founded B.C. 335; Cales, founded B.C. 332; Anxur or 
Tarracina, founded B.C. 326; Fregellse, founded B.C. 325; Luceria, founded 
B.C. 312; Suessa Aurunca and Pontise, founded B.C. 311; Casinum and 
Interamna, founded B.C. 310; Saticula, founded probably about the same 
time ; Sora and Alba Fucentia, founded B.C. 302 ; Carseoli, founded B.C. 301 ; 
Narnia, founded B.C. 299; Minturnae and Sinuessa, founded B.C. 296; 
Venusia, founded B.C. 291 — 20,000 colonists sent there ; Hatria in Picenum, 
founded B.C. 289; Sena, founded B.C. 283; Psestum and Cosa, founded 
B.C. 273 ; Beneventum and Ariminum, founded B.C. 268 ; Firmium and 
Castrum Novum, founded B.C. 264; and ^sernia, founded B.C. 263. Of 
these by far the greater number were colonice LatincB ; but Ostia, Circeii, and 
the maritime colonies generally were colonice ci-vium Romanorum. 

14. Closely connected with the Roman colonial system was 
that of the military roads. The genius of Appius Claudius Caecus 
Military ^^'^t conceived the idea of connecting Rome with 
roads. her newly annexed dependency, Campania^ by a solid 
paved road of excellent construction (b.c. 310 to 306). This road, 
which issued from the Porta Capena (Gate of Capua) passed 
through Aricia, Velitrae, Setia, Tarracina, Minturnse, Sinuessa, and 
Casilinum to Capua j whence it was carried, probably as early as 
B.C. 391, to Venusia, and later to Brundusium. Much of the work 
still remains, and attracts the admiration of travellers. 

It is doubtful whether any other of the great -vicB belong to this period. 
The 'Via Valeria' probably took its name from the censor of B.C. 305, 
M. Valerius Maximus ; but it is not likely that any part of the real solid mia 
was made by him. 

On the general subject of the Roman Roads, see the work of Bergier, 
Histoire des grands chemins de V Empire Romaine (Paris, 1622, 4to.); and NiBBY, 
Delle Vie degli Antichi dissertazione, in the 4th volume of the 4th Roman edi- 
tion of Nardini's Roma Antica (Roma, 1818-20; 4 vols. Svo.). 

On the colonial system of the Romans, see Madvig, J. N., De Jure et Con- 
ditione Coloniarum Populi Romani, Haunise, 1832 ; 4to. 



PARTI. PER. III.] ROMAN GOVERNMENT OF ITALY. 381 

15. The mode in which Rome, having attained her supremacy, 
administered the government of Italy, was exceedingly compli- 
cated. It is impossible in a work like the present 

, , . , • ,- . r . 1 Relations of 

to do more than point out the main features of the Rome to the 

system, and distinguish, one from another, the prin- subject 

^ -' ij J ^ I communities, 

cipal classes into which the population of the state 

was divided. Broadly, we may say that the Roman Republic 
bore sway in Italy over a host of minor republics. Self-govern- 
ment was most widely spread. Every colony was a sort of 
independent community, electing its own oiScers and administer- 
ing its own affairs. Every foreign city under their rule was 
recognised by the Romans as a separate state, and was placed on a 
certain definite footing with regard to the central community. The 
most highly favoured were the fcederata civitates — states that had 
submitted to Rome upon terms, varying of course in dijfFerent 
cases, but in all implying the management of their own affairs, 
the appointment of their own governors, and the administration 
of their own laws. Next to these in advantage of position were 
the municipia, foreign states which had received all the burthens 
together with some or all of the rights of Roman citizenship. Last 
of all came the dedititn^ natives of communities which had sur- 
rendered themselves to Rome absolutely, and which had all the 
burthens without any of the rights of citizens. Roman law was 
administered in these communities by a governor {frafectm) 
appointed by Rome. 

Besides the classes above enumerated, and occupying a still lower position, 
were, (i) the nati-ve inhabitants of the cities occupied by Roman or Latin 
colonies, who were almost without rights ; and (2) the Slaves, who were the 
absolute property of their masters. 

16. Rome reserved to herself three principal rights, whereby 
she regarded her sovereignty as sufficiently guarded, {a) She alone 
might make peace or declare war j [b) she alone Rights of 
might receive embassies from foreign powers; and sovereignty 
[c] she alone might coin money. She had also herself by 
undoubtedly the right {d) of requiring from her Rome, 
subject-allies such contingents of troops as she needed in any war; 
which involved a further right [e) of indirect taxation, since the 
contingents were armed and paid by the community which fur- 
nished them. She did not, like Athens, directly tax her subject- 
allies ; but she derived nevertheless an important revenue from 
them. On the conquest of a state, Rome always claimed to 



382 ROME. [BOOK V. 

succeed to the rights of the previously existing government ; and, 
as each Italian state had a public domain of some kind or other, 
Rome, as she pushed her conquests, became mistress of a vast 
amount of real property of various kinds, as especially, mines, 
forests, quarries^ fisheries, salt-works, and the like. Further, gene- 
rally, when a state submitted to her after a war^ she required, 
beyond all these sources of revenue, the cession of a tract of arable 
or pasture land, which she added to her old 'ager publicus/ 
Thus the domain of Rome was continually increasing ; and it was 
(at least in part) to collect the revenue from the domain through- 
out Italy that, in b.c. 267, the four 'Italian quaestors' were 
appointed, 'the first Roman functionaries to whom a residence 
and a district out of Rome were assigned by law/ 

17. The constitutional changes in Rome itself during the 
period under consideration were not very numerous or important. 

Constitutional They consisted mainly in the carrying out to their 
changes in logical rcsult of the Licinio-Sextian enactments — 

Rome itself. . , , i • • , . _ , 

Equalisation m the complete equalisation, that is, of the two 
of the Orders. Qrders. By the laws of Publilius Philo, of Ovinius, 
and of the Ogulnii the last vestiges of Patrician ascendancy were 
removed, and the Plebeians were placed in all important respects 
on a complete equality with the Patricians. Admitted practically 
to a full moiety of the high governmental offices, they acquired by 
degrees, through the operation of the Ovinian law, an influence 
fully equal to that of the Patricians in the Senate. By the 
tribunate, which remained exclusively theirs, they had even an 
advantage over the other Order. The stronghold of the exclusive 
party^ which last yielded itself, was, naturally, that of religious 
privilege. But when the Pontificate and the Augurship were 
fairly divided between the Orders, the struggle between the 
' houses ' and the commons was over, and there was nothing left 
for the latter to desire. 

Legislation of Publilius Philo, B.C. 339. One place in the censorship 
secured to the Plebeians. Praetorship (probably) thrown open. Right of the 
Patrician Assembly to interfere with legislation abolished, or made a mere 
form. Law of Ovinius (date uncertain) gives all ex-consuls, praetors, and 
curule cediles a right to seats in the Senate. Ogulnian Law, B.C. 300, 
enlarges the colleges of Pontiffs and Augurs, and gives half the places in each 
to the Plebeians. 

18. But the termination of the internal struggle which had 
hitherto occupied the commonwealth, and secured it against the 



PART I. PEE. III.] FIRST DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT. 383 

deadly evil of political stagnation, was not complete before a new 
agitation manifested itself^ an agitation of a far 
more dangerous character than that which was now agitation. 
just coming to an end. Hitherto the right of attempTcTf 
suffrage at Rome, at any rate in the more important Appius 
of the two popular assemblies — the tribes [comitia Csecus^ 
tributa)^ — had rested upon the double basis of free to establish 
birth and the possession of a plot of freehold land. ' - 

About B.C. 312, the class which these qualifications excluded from 
the franchise began to exhibit symptoms of discontent. Appius Clau- 
dius Csecus, one of the boldest of political innovators, perceiving 
these symptoms, and_, either regarding them as a real peril to the 
State or as indicating an occasion which he might turn to his own 
personal advantage, being censor in the year above mentioned, 
came forward as the champion of the excluded classes, and, after 
vainly attempting to introduce individuals belonging to them into 
the Senate, enrolled the entire mass both in the centuries and in 
the tribes. Nor was this all. Instead of assigning the new 
voters to the city tribes_, within whose local limits they for the 
most part dwelt^ Appius spread them through all, or a majority, of 
the tribes, and thus gave them practically an absolute control 
over the elections. Their power was soon seen, (i) in the elec- 
tion of a freedman, Cn. Flavius, to the curule gedileship, which 
gave him a seat in the Senate for the remainder of his life j and 
(a) in the election of tribunes who enabled Appius to prolong 
his term of office illegally to the close of the fourth year. This 
was the inauguration of a real ochlocracy, a government in which 
the preponderating weight belonged to the lowest class of the 
people. Evil consequences would no doubt have been rapidly 
developed, had not the work of Appius been to a great extent 
undone — the sting extracted from his measures — by the skill and 
boldness of two most sagacious censors. When Q^Fabius Maxi- 
mus and P. Decius Mus, b.c. 304, removed all who Moderate 
were without landed qualification and all the poorer arrangement 
freedmen from the country tribes, and distributed q. Fabius 
them among the four city tribes only, the revolu- Maximus. 
tionary force of Ap. Claudius^ proceedings was annulled, and 
nothing remained but a very harmless, and almost nominal enfran- 
chisement of the lower orders. When the ' factio forensis ' could 
command the votes of four tribes only out of thirty-one, or 



384 ROME. [BOOK V. 

ultimately of thirty-five, it was rendered powerless in the comitia 
trtbuta. In the centuries it was of course even weaker, since 
there wealth had a vast preponderance over mere numbers. 

19. The pressure of poverty still continued to be felt at Rome 

for many years after the Licinian, and even after the Genucian 

legislation. An insurrection, proceeding to the 

poverty length of a secession, occurred in b.c. 387 in conse- 

by means of quence of the wide-spread distress. An abolition 

colonies. \, , , ,- i i n 

of debts was found to be once more a btate neces- 
sity, and was submitted to with a view to peace and the conten- 
tation of the poorer classes. But the tide of military success, 
which soon afterwards set in, put a stop for a long term of years 
to this ground of complaint and disturbance. The numerous and 
large colonies which were continually being sent out from b.c. 233 
to 177, were an effectual relief to the proletariate, and put an end 
for the time to anything like extreme poverty among Roman 
citizens. At the same time the farming of the revenue largely 
increased the wealth of the more opulent classes. It is not till 
about B.C. 133 that we find the questions of debt and of the relief 
of poverty once more brought into prominence and recognised as 
matters which require the attention of statesmen. 



FOURTH PERIOD. 

From the Commencement of the First War with Carthage to the Rise 
0/ the Civil Broils under the Gracchi, b.c, 264 to 133. 

Sources. The most important of the ancient authorities for this period is 
PoLYBius, the earliest writer in whom we see fully developed the true spirit 
of historical criticism. If the great work of this author (see p. 5) had come 
down to us in a complete form, we should no more have needed any other 
authority for the period treated in it, than we need any work, besides that 
of Thucydides, for the history of the Peloponnesian War, from B.C. 431 to 
411. Unfortunately, the complete books descend no lower than B.C. 216 ; and 
even the fragments fail us from the year B.C. 146. Consequently, after 
B.C. 216 we have to depend very much upon other writers, as especially LiVY, 
whose ' Second Decade' covers the space from B.C. 218 to 166, thus taking up 
the history almost exactly where the complete books of Polybius break off. 
Next to Polybius and Livy may be placed Appian, whose Punka, Bellum 
Hannibalicum and Iberica belong to this period and occasionally throw im- 
portant light upon the course of events. The epitome of Florus is not here 
of much value. The biographer, Plutarch, on the other hand, is a consider- 
able help, his ' Lives ' of Fabius Maximus, P. ^milius, Marcellus, M. Cato, and 
Flamininus falling, all of them, within this brief space of one hundred and 
thirty years. The short Life of Hannibal by Corn. Nepos possesses also 



PART I. PER. IV.] FIRST ROMAN FLEET. 385 

some interest ; and occasional aid may be derived from Diodorus, and 

ZONARAS. 

Of modern writers on this portion of Roman History, besides those already 
noticed {supra, pp. 334 and 335), the following should be consulted: — 

Montesquieu, Marquis DE, Considerations sur les causes de la grandeur des 
Romains et de leur decadence. Amsterdam, 1734 ; 8vo. 

1 . In the ' Fourth Period ' of Roman History, as in the ^ Third ' 
(see p. 372)5 and even more decidedly, the interest attaches itself 
to the external relations of the people rather than to 

their internal condition. The interval comprises Period, 
the long struggle with Carthage, the Gallic War and interest of 
conquest of the plain of the Po, the three Mace- the external 
donian Wars, the war with Antiochus of Syria, the '^ ^'^^ 
conquest of Greece, the Numantine War, and the reduction of 
most of the Spanish Peninsula. At the commencement of the 
period the dominion of Rome was confined to the mere peninsular 
portion of Italy j at its close she bore sway over the whole of 
Southern Europe from the shores of the Atlantic to the straits of 
Constantinople, over the chief Mediterranean islands, and over 
a portion of North Africa ; while, further, her influence was para- 
mount throughout the East, where Pergamus and Egypt were her 
dependants, and Syria existed merely by her sufferance. In 
B.C. 264, she had just reached a position entitling her to count 
among the ' Great Powers ' of the world, as it then was ; to rank, 
i. e. with Carthage, Macedonia, and Syria; in b.c. 134, she had 
absorbed two of these 'Great Powers,' and made the third a 
dependency. She was clearly the sole ' Great Power ' left ; or, if 
there was a second, it was the newly formed empire beyond the 
Euphrates — that of the Parthians — which rose up as Syria declined, 
and which ultimately remained the only counterpoise to the 
Roman State through the whole period of its greatness. 

2. The circumstances of the struggle with Pyrrhus, and the 
Southern Italians, had forced Rome to become to some extent a 
maritime power. As she gradually mastered Italy, _ 

s- D y y? Commence- 

it became necessary to protect her coasts, exposed as ment of 
they were to attack from Epirus, from Sicily, from between 
Carthage, even from Greece, as experience showed. Rome and 
Accordingly a fleet began to be formed as early as 
B.C. 338, which received constant additions, and had by the year 
B.C. 267 acquired such importance that four 'quaestors of the fleet' 
[quastores classict) were then appointed, and stationed at different 

c c 



386 ROME, [BOOK v. 

ports of Italy, with the special object of guarding the coasts and 
keeping the marine in an efficient condition. But this new ten- 
dency on the part of the great Italian state could not fail to 
provoke the jealousy of the chief maritime" power of the Western 
Mediterranean, Carthage, whose policy it had always been to 
oppose the establishment of any naval rival in the waters which 
she regarded as her own. Thus, unfriendly feelings, arising out of 
a consciousness of clashing interests, had for some time been 
growing up between Carthage and Rome. Temporarily suspended 
during the height of the Pyrrhic War, when a common danger for 
a while drew the two states together^ they burst out at its close in 
greater force than ever; and nothing was needed but a decent 
pretext, in order that the two lukewarm allies should become 
open and avowed enemies. 

3. The pretext was not long wanting. The Mamertines, a 

body of Campanian mercenaries who had seized Messana, being 

threatened with destruction by the combined Cartha- 

First 

Punic War, ginians and Syracusans^ applied for help to Rome, 
^- ^- and were readily received into her alliance. Rome 

264-241. ■' 

invaded Sicily, and by an act of treachery made her- 
self mistress of the disputed post. War with Carthage necessarily 
followed, a war for the possession of Sicily, and for maritime 
supremacy in the Mediterranean. The most remarkable feature 
of the war was the rapid development of the Roman naval power 
during its course — a development which is without a parallel in 
the history of the world. With few and insignificant exceptions, 
the Romans were landsmen till B.C. 262. In that year they began 
to form a powerful fleet. Only two years later, B.C. 3<5o, they 
completely defeated, under Duilius, the whole naval force of the 
Carthaginians ; and the supremacy thus acquired they succeeded in 
maintaining by the later victories of Regulus and Lutatius. Their 
victories by sea emboldened them to send an army across to 
Africa, and to attack their enemy in his own country. Success at 
first attended the efforts of Regulus ; but after a little while he was 
involved in difficulties, and his entire army was either slain or 
captured. But notwithstanding this and numerous other disasters, 
the indomitable spirit of the Romans prevailed. After twenty- 
three years of perpetual warfare, Carthage felt herself exhausted, 
and sued for peace. The terms which she obtained required 
her to evacuate Sicily and the adjacent islands, to pay to Rome 



PART I. PER. IV.] FIRST PUNIC WAR. 387 

a war contribution of 2,200 talents, to acknowledge the inde- 
pendence of Hiero, king of Syracuse, and bind herself not to 
make war on him or his allies. 

Details of the "War. Invasion of Sicily by the Romans, B.C. 264. Occu- 
pation of Messana. The Carthaginians and Hiero attempt its recovery, but 
fail. Hiero deserts the Carthaginian side and becomes an ally of Rome, 
B.C. 263. His example is follovs^ed by the Greek towns generally. The 
Romans besiege Agrigentum, which is defended by Hannibal, son of Gisgo, 
B.C. 262. Attempt to raise the siege fails, and Agrigentum falls. First eiforts 
of Rome to construct a powerful fleet. Fleet of 120 sail launched, B.C. 260. 
Victory of Duilius at Mylee, due to the invention of boarding bridges. Corsica 
attacked, B.C. 259. Aleria taken. Indecisive combat off Cape Tyndaris, 
B.C. 257. Great victory of Ecnomus, B.C. 256, and invasion of Africa by 
M. Atilius Regulus, who is successful at first, but in B.C. 255 suffers a complete 
defeat, and falls into the enemy's hands. The Romans evacuate Africa. 
Destruction of their fleet by storms. Great despondency at Rome, B.C. 253. 
The war confined to Sicily, where Thermae is taken, B.C. 252, and Eryx, B.C. 249. 
Lilybaeum, however, and Drepana still hold out ; and in an attempt to take 
the latter, B.C. 249, the Roman fleet is completely destroyed. Six years of 
petty warfare follow, B.C. 248 to B.C. 242, the advantage remaining on the 
whole with the Carthaginians, who, under Hamilcar Barca, i-ecover some of 
their lost ground in Sicily, and at the same time infest the Roman coasts with 
their privateers. At last, however, in B.C. 241, Rome once more makes a 
great effort. A number of the citizens from their private resources build and 
man a fleet of 200 sail, which they present to the nation ; and with this fleet 
the consul, C. Lutatius, gains a great victory at the jEgates Insulae, which 
completely breaks the spirit of the Carthaginians and induces them to consent 
to a peace on the terms above mentioned. 

4. The great importance of this war was, that it forced Rome 
to become a first-rate naval power. Though the Romans did not 
during its course obtain the complete mastery of the importance 
sea, they showed themselves fully a match for the of the war. 
Carthaginians on the element of which they had scarcely any 
previous experience. Their land force being much superior to 
that of Carthage, and their resources not greatly inferior, it 
became tolerably apparent, that success would ultimately rest with 
them. Their chief deficiency was in generalship, wherein their 
commanders were decidedly surpassed, not only by the Cartha- 
ginian patriot Hamilcar, but even the mercenary Xanthippus. 
Here the Roman system was principally to blame, whereby the 
commanders were changed annually, and the same person was 
expected to be able to command equally well both by land and 
by sea. Carthage continued her commanders in office, and had 
separate ones for the land and the sea service. Even Carthage, 
however, was unwise enough to deprive herself of the services of 
many an experienced captain by the barbarous practice of putting 
to death any general or admiral who experienced a reverse. 

c c 2 



388 ROME. [book v. 

5. An interval of twenty three years separated the First from the 

Second Punic War. It was employed by both sides in energetic 

^ , efforts to consolidate and extend their power, 

-burther *• 

progress of Rome, in b.c. 23 8^ taking advantage of the position 

SeTzu^e^of ^^ which Carthage was placed by the revolt of her 

Sardinia and mercenaries, made herself mistress of the island of 

orsica. Sardinia, and when, upon the submission of the 

mercenaries, Carthage required its restoration, played the part 

of the wolf in the fable, declared herself injured by her victim, 

and threatened a renewal of the war. Exhausted Carthage had 

to purchase her forbearance by the cession of the island, and the 

payment of a fine amounting to 1,200 talents, b.c. ly], Rome then 

proceeded to annex Corsica.; and soon afterwards (e.g. 227) she 

laid the foundation of her provincial system by the establishment 

of her first 'Proconsuls/ one to administer her possessions in 

Sicily, the other to govern Sardinia and Corsica. 

Chief Points of the Provincial System of Rome. The Proconsul 
unites in his own person the supreme military and civil functions. He is at 
once commander-in-chief, governor, and supreme judge. The revenue, how- 
ever, is administered by quaestors responsible to the Senate. Native authorities 
are to a great extent tolerated; and diiFerent degrees of privilege are con- 
ferred on different portions of a province. No regular contingent of troops is 
required ; but in lieu of this burthen, one-tenth of the produce of the whole 
land is claimed by Rome as hers, and a tax of 5 per cent, is levied on all 
imports and exports. 

6. About the same time that she seized Sardinia, Rome was 
engaged in a war with the Bdii (Gauls) and Ligures in North 

Italy, in which the Boii are said to have been the 

War 

with the Boii, aggressors. Unsuccessful in their attempts during 

2<?s 9^fi the campaigns of b.c. 238 and %'3^>]^ these barbarians, 

in B.C. 236, invited the aid of their kindred tribes 

from beyond the Alps ; but the allies after a little while fell out, 

and the Boii and Ligures were glad to buy peace of Rome by the 

cession of some of their lands. 

7. Rome, soon afterwards, showed herself for the first time on 
the eastern coast of the Adriatic, and took part in the affairs of 

Sup ression G^'^^^^' The decay of Grecian power had allowed 

oflllyrian the piratical dispositions of the Illyrians to have 

Lodgment ^^^^ course ; and the commerce of the Adriatic, the 

effected in coasts of Epirus and Corcyra, and perhaps even that 

of Italy to some extent^ suffered from the constant 

attacks of Illyrian cruisers. Entreated to protect them by the 



PAKTi. PEii. IV.] CONQUEST OF CISALPINE GAUL. 389 

unhappy Greek cities, the Romans, in b.c. 230, sent an embassy 
to Scodra, to re.quire the cessation of the piracies. Their ambas- 
sadors were murdered j and a war necessarily followed. Rome, in 
B.C. 329, with a fleet of 200 ships, cleared the Adriatic, made the 
Illyrians of Scodra tributary, established Demetrius of Pharos as 
dependent dynast over the coasts and islands of Dalmatia, and 
accepted the protectorate of the Greeks of Apollonia, Epidamnus, 
and Corcyra. In return, the Greeks acknowledged the Romans 
as their kin, and admitted them to participation in the* Isthmian 
games and the Eleusinian mysteries. Thus Rome obtained a 
hold upon the opposite side of the Adriatic, and a right of inter- 
ference in the affairs of Greece. 

8. A still more important war soon followed. Rome, before 
engaging in any further enterprises beyond the limits of Italy, was 
anxious to extend her dominion to its natural boun- conquest of 
dary upon the north, the great chain of the Alps which Cisalpine 
shuts off Italy from the rest of Europe. With this b.c' 

view, she proceeded, about B.C. 232, to make large 225-222. 
assignments of land, and plant new and important colonies, in the 
territory of the Senones, thus augmenting her strength towards the 
north and preparing for a great contest with the Gauls. These last, 
finding themselves threatened, at once flew to arms. Obtaining 
aid from their kindred tribes in and beyond the Alps, they crossed 
the Apennines in b.c. 225, and spread themselves far and wide 
over Etruria, advancing as far as Clusium, and threatening Rome 
as in the days of Brennus. Three armies took the field against 
them, and though one, composed of Etruscans, was completely 
defeated, the two others, combining their attack, gained a great 
victory over the invaders near Telamon, and forced them to 
evacuate Etruria. Rome then carried the war into the plain of 
the Po. Having allied herself with the Veneti, and even with the 
Gallic tribe adjoining them, the Cenomani, she was able in a little 
time to reduce the whole tract to subjection. The Boii and Lin- 
gones submitted in b.c. 224, the Anari in b.c. 223 ^ the Insubres 
were conquered after a fierce struggle, which occupied the years 
B.C. 223 and 222. Mediolanum and Comum, the last towns 
which held out, submitted in the last-named year, and Roman 
dominion was at length extended to the great barrier of the Alps. 

To establish herself firmly in the valuable tract thus conquered, Rome 
planted it thickly with colonies. Of these the most important were Placentia 
(Piacenza), Cremona and Mutina (Modena) ; to which were added afterwards 



390 ROME. [book v. 

Parma, Mediolanum, Brixia, Comum, Verona, and Mantua. The newly con- 
quered tract was at the same time attached to the capital by the ' Flaminian 
Way,' which was carried to Narnia about B.C. 300, to Spoletium in B.C. 240, 
and to Ariminium in B.C. 220. 

9. These conquests were scarcely effected when fresh troubles 
broke out in Illyria. Demetrius of Pharos, dissatisfied with the 

position accorded him by the Romans, declared 

Demetrius himself independent, attacked the Roman allies, and 

of Pharos, encouraged the Illyrians to resume the practice of 

piracy. Allied with Antigonus Doson (see p. 266), 

he thought himself strong enough to defy the Roman power. But 

Antigonus dying, B.C. 230, and Philip, his successor, being a mere 

boy, a Roman army, in b.c. 319, chastised Demetrius, destroyed 

his capita], and drove him from his kingdom. 

10. It was ill-judged in Rome to allow this petty quarrel to 
draw her attention to the East, when in the West an enemy had 

, , , arisen, against whom her utmost efforts were now 

Growth of the ' ^ 

Carthaginian needed. From the moment that Carthage was not only 

iifspdn robbed of Sardinia, but forced to pay a fine for having 

B.C. ventured to remonstrate against the wrong done 

236—220 

her, the determination to resume the struggle with 
Rome at the first convenient opportunity became a fixed national 
sentiment. There was indeed a peace party in the Punic commu- 
nity ; but it had little weight or force. The advocates of war, who 
had found their fitting leaders in the warriors of the Barcine 
family — Hamilcar, his sons, and son-in-law — were all-powerful in 
the government 5 and under them it became and remained the one 
sole object of Carthage to bring herself into a position in which she 
could hope to renew her contest with her hated antagonist on such 
terms as might promise her a fair prospect of success. No sooner 
was the revolt of the mercenaries put down (b.c. 337) by the 
judicious efforts of Hamilcar Barca, than the project was formed 
of obtaining in Spain a compensation, and more than a compensa- 
tion, for all that had been lost in Sicily,. Sardinia, and the lesser 
islands. Hamilcar, in the last nine years of his life, b.c. 336 
to 328, established the Carthaginian power over the whole of 
Southern and South-Eastern Spain, the fairest portion of the pen- 
insula. His work was carried on and completed in the course 
of the next eight years, b.c. 327 to 330, by his son-in-law, Has- 
drubal. Andalusia, Murcia, and Valencia were occupied. A 
warlike population, Iberic and Celtic, was reduced and trained 



PART I. PEE. IV.] PLANS OF HANNIBAL. 391 

to arms under Carthaginian officers. Towns were built ; trade 
prospered ; agriculture flourished. Above all, the rich silver-mines 
near Carthagena (Carthago Nova) were discovered and skilfully 
worked j Spain more than paid her expenses; and the home- 
treasury was amply provided with those ' sinews of war,' without 
which a sustained military effort is impossible. 

II. The indifference with which Rome saw this extension of 
the Carthaginian power is very surprising. She did indeed make 
alliance with the semi-Greek communities of Sagun- ^^ 

" Passive 

tum (Zacynthus) and Emporize about B.C. 236, and at attitude of 
the same time obtained a promise from Hasdrubal °^^' 

that he would not push his conquests beyond the Ebro ; but other- 
wise she appeared unobservant or careless of her rival's acquisitions. 
Probably she thought that the designs of Carthage were in the 
main commercial, and regarded an invasion of Italy from the 
side of Spain as simply an impossibility. Perhaps she thought her 
enemy's strength so much reduced, and her own so much increased, 
as to render it inconceivable that the struggle should ever be 
renewed^ unless she chose at her own time to force a contest. As 
she remained mistress of the sea, and Carthage did not even make 
any effort to dispute her maritime supremacy, it seemed difficult for 
her rival to attack her in any quarter, while it was easy for her to 
carry the war into any portion of the Carthaginian territory. 

13. But Hannibal, sworn from his boyhood to eternal hatred 
of Rome, had determined, as soon as he succeeded to the com- 
mand (B.C. 330), on the mode and route by which he pi^ns of 
would seek to give vent to his enmity, to save his Hanmbai. 
own nation and at the same time destroy her foe. Fully appre- 
ciating the weakness of Carthage for defence, it was his scheme to 
carry the war without a moment's unnecessary delay into the 
enemy's country^ to give the Romans ample employment there, and 
see if he could not exhaust their resources and shatter their con- 
federacy. The land route from Spain to Italy had for him no terrors. 
He could count on- the good dispositions of most of the Celtic 
tribes, who looked on him as the destined deliverer of Cisalpine 
Gaul from the iron gripe of Rome. He probably knew but little of 
the dangers and difficulties of crossing the Alps ; but he was well 
aware that they had been often crossed by the Gauls, and that he 
would find in the Alpine valleys an ample supply of friendly and 
experienced guides. Arrived in Cisalpine Gaul, he would have the 



392 ROME. [book v. 

whole population with him, and he would be able, after due con- 
sideration, to determine on his further course. With the veteran 
army which he brought from Spain, and with his own strategic 
ability, he trusted to defeat any force that Rome could bring 
into the field against him. For ultimate success he depended on his 
power of loosening the ties which bound the Italic confederacy 
together, of raising up enemies to Rome in Italy itself, and at the 
same time of maintaining his army in such efficiency that it 
might be distinctly recognised as master of the open field, incap- 
able of being resisted unless behind walls, or by defensive guerilla 
warfare. With these views and objects^ Hannibal, in b.c. 319, 
commenced the Second Punic War by laying siege to Saguntum. 

13. The issue of the Second Punic War was determined by the 
dauntless resolution and the internal vigour of Rome. She had 

opposed to her the most consummate general of anti- 
Second Punic . , , , , , . , . 

War; ^^ity ; a state as populous, and richer in resources 

Its general 'C^z.n her own : a veteran army : a possible combina- 

course. j j i. 

tion of various powerful allies ; above all, an amount 
of disafl^ection among her own subjects^ the extent of which could 
not be estimated beforehand, but which was at any rate sure to be 
considerable. Three battles showed that Hannibal was irresistible 
in the field^ and taught the Romans to avoid general engagements. 
The third was followed by a wide-spread defection of the Roman 
subject-allies — all Italy from Samnium and Campania southwards 
passed over to the side of Hannibal. But the rest of the fede- 
ration stood firm. Not a Latin deserted to the enemy. Central 
Italy from sea to sea held to Rome. She had the resources of 
Etruria, Umbria, Picenum, Sabina, Latium, to draw upon, besides 
her own. By immense efforts, including the contraction of a 
large National Debt, she contrived to maintain her ground, and 
gradually to reduce Hannibal to the defensive. The alliances, by 
which Hannibal sought to better his position^ with Syracuse, 
B.C. 315, and with Philip of Macedon, e.g. 316, did him scant 
service^ Rome in each case meeting the new enemy on his own 
ground, and there keeping him fully employed. The hopes of a 
successful issue to Carthage then rested upon the junction of the 
second army of Spain, under Hasdrubal, with the reduced force of 
Hannibal in Italy, a junction frustrated by the battle of the Me- 
taurus, which was thus the turning-point of the war. After this 
reverse, the transfer of the war into Africa was a matter of 



PART I. PER. IV.] SECOND PUNIC WAR. 393 

course; and this transfer rendered necessary the recall of Hannibal 
from Italy and the relinquishment of all the great hopes which his 
glorious enterprise had excited. There remained just a possibility 
that in a last pitched battle on his native soil, Hannibal's genius 
might re-establish the superiority of the Carthaginian arms. But 
the battle of Zama removed this final chance. Hannibal met in 
Scipio Africanus a general, not indeed his equal, but far superior 
to any of those with whom he had been previously engaged ; and, 
his troops being mostly of inferior quality, he suffered, through no 
fault of his own, the great defeat which rendered further resist- 
ance impossible. Carthage, after Zama, became a dependent 
Roman ally. 

Details of the "War. The Second Punic War may be divided into three 
periods — a first period of three years, from the fall of Saguntum to Cannae, 
a period of uninterrupted Carthaginian victory, B.C. 218 to 216; a second 
period of nine years, from Cannae to the battle of the Metaurus, a time of 
alternate victory and reverse, during which there was still a good hope that 
the great enterprise of the Carthaginian general might be crowned with 
ultimate success, B.C. 215 to 207 ; and a third period of six years, a time 
of constant Roman advance and progress, when the termination of the war in 
favour of Rome was certain, and the only question was how long resistance 
could be protracted, B.C. 206 to 201. 

First Period, B.C. 218 to 216. — B.C. 218. Passage of the Pyrenees, and the 
Rhone. Encounter with the army of P. Cornelius Scipio on the left bank of 
the river. March to the Alps, and passage of the great chain, probably by the 
Little St. Bernard, in the month of September. Capture of Turin. The 
Ligurians, and the Celts generally, declare for Hannibal. Scipio defeated in a 
cavalry engagement on the Ticino. Great battle of the Trebia in the same 
year (December) makes Hannibal master of the whole of Northern Italy. — 
B.C. 217. Passage of the Apennines, and march through the marshes of 
Northern Etruria. Hannibal loses an eye. Great victory on the shores of 
Lake Trasimene. Alarm at Rome. Q^Fabius Maximus made dictator. A 
siege expected. Hannibal marches through Umbria into Picenum, where he 
rests and reorganises his army. He then proceeds along the coast into 
Southern Italy, hoping to produce insurrection among the Roman allies, who, 
however, remain faithful. The dictator, Fabius (Cunctator), keeps an army 
in the field, but avoids an engagement. Hannibal winters in Apuha. — B.C. 216. 
Great effort made by Rome to crush the invader terminates in the terrible 
disaster of Canns, where Rome loses from 70,000 to 80,000 men. Accession 
of Philip of Macedon and of Syracuse to the Carthaginian alliance. General 
defection of the Southern Italians and especially of Capua. Noble attitude of 
Rome in her hour of greatest danger. Resolve to continue the war and, while 
maintaining the struggle both in Spain and Italy, to attack Macedonia and 
Syracuse. 

The question of the pass by which Hannibal crossed the Alps has been a 
matter of much controversy, and can scarcely be said even now to be settled ; 
but the weight of modern authority is decidedly in favour of the Little 
St. Bernard. The chief works on the subject are : — 

Whitaker, Rev. J., T/6e Course of Hannibal owr the Alps ascertained. 
London, 1794; 2 vols. 8vo. This writer argues in favour of the Great 
St. Bernard. 

Cramer (Dean) and Wickham, G. L., Dissertation on the Passage of Hannibal 
o'ver the Alps. Oxford, 1820; 8vo. 



394 ROME. [BOOK v. 

Long, H. L., The March of Hannibal from the Rhone to the Alps. London, 
183 1 ; 8vo. 

Ellis, Rev. R., A Treatise on Hannibal's Passage of the Alps, in ivhich his 
route is traced o'ver the Little Mt. Cenis. Cambridge, 1854. And the same 
writer's Enquiry into the Ancient Routes betnveen Italy and Gaul; <ivith an Exami- 
nation of the Theory of Hannibal's Passage of the Alps by the Little St. Bernard. 
Cambridge, 1867; 8vo. 

Law, W, J., The Alps of Hannibal. London, 1866 ; Svo. 

Second Period, B.C. 215 to 207. The second period of the War is devoid 
of any great battles, until the one with which it closes, and is (comparatively 
speaking) uninteresting. Hannibal, having to protect the Southern Italians, 
who have come over to him, is reduced to the defensive. As he cannot 
detach the Latins, or the Northern Italians, from the Roman confederacy, he 
needs some great accession of force in order to bring the war to a successful 
issue. For such an accession he long continues to hope ; but it never arrives. 
Philip of Macedon is kept employed in Illyricum and Greece from B.C. 214 to 
207, when peace is made with him. (See above, p. 271.) Syracuse is besieged 
by Marcellus, B.C. 214, and tak.en, B.C. 212. Hasdrubal is detained in Spain 
year after year, first by the brothers Cn. and P. Cornelius Scipio, and then by 
the young Pubhus (afterwards known as Africanus) until B.C. 208, when, at 
the sacrifice of a portion of his army, he makes his way to the northward, 
crosses the Pyrenees, and, wintering in Gaul, proceeds the next spring by the 
route which his brother had followed, across the Alps, into Italy. The Gauls 
and Ligurians join him. Etruria and Umbria waver in their allegiance. 
Rome seems to be brought into greater danger than ever. But once more 
her constancy and courage assert themselves. Every man capable of bear- 
ing arms is called out to fight. Twenty-three legions are enrolled. Above 
all, by a masterly manoeuvre, the consul, Claudius Nero, deceives Hannibal, 
and marching away to the north with half his army, concentrates the great 
bulk of the Roman strength against Hasdrubal, and crushes him on the 
Metaurus, before he can effect a junction with his long expectant brother, 
B.C. 207. With the defeat of Hasdrubal disappears the last ray of hope for 
Carthage, which has no further reserve that can be brought into play with 
any prospect of affecting the general issue. 

Third Period, B.C. 206 to 201. It is surprising that the Romans did not 
carry the war into Africa in the year following the battle of the Metaurus. 
Nothing more was to be feared from Hannibal, who had retreated into the 
further corner of Bruttium. Much less was the expedition of Mago to North 
Italy, B.C. 205, a real danger. It would seem that the Senate hesitated owing 
to the want of any general of sufficient ability, who at the same time was suffi- 
ciently popular to call forth a national effort. Thus it was not till B.C. 204 
that an expedition was actually sent into Africa, under the young Scipio, who 
had recently returned from Spain with a deservedly high reputation. Scipio, 
having landed, besieged Utica, but was shortly driven back to the coast, and 
wintered on a promontory, where he intrenched himself. The next year, 
however, B.C. 203, he assumed an aggressive attitude; defeated the Cartha- 
ginian levies in two battles; took Syphax prisoner; and forced the Punic 
government, as a last resource, to recall Hannibal. That general arrived from 
Italy in B.C. 202, and after a vain attempt at negotiation, made a last effort to 
turn the scale in favour of his country at the battle of Zama, where, however, 
he suffered defeat, though a defeat without dishonour. Negotiations were 
then renewed, and a peace was concluded (b.c. 201) on the terms which 
follow : — (i) The relinquishment by Carthage of all her territory beyond the 
limits of Africa; (2) an engagement on her part not to engage in war out of 
Africa, nor even in Africa without permission from the Romans ; (3) the pay- 
ment to Rome of an annual contribution of 200 talents (48,800/.} for the next 
fifty years; (4) the surrender of all their ships except ten, and all their 
elephants ; and (5) the restoration to Masinissa of all that had belonged to 



PART I. PER. IV.] PROGRESS OF ROME. 395 

himself or to his ancestors. These terms were, on the whole, moderate and 
fair under the circumstances; and it is creditable to Scipio that he had 
the clemency to propose, and to Hannibal that he had the wisdom to accept, 
them. 

The history of the Hannibalic, or Second Punic War, has been particularly 
well written by Dr. Arnold. See his History of Rome, vol. iii, pp. 63 to 455. 

14. The gains of Rome by the Second Punic War were, in the 
first placCj the complete removal of Carthage from the position of 
a counterpoise and rival to that of a small dependent q^^^^^ of 
community, powerless for good or evil ; secondly, Rome by the 
the addition to the Roman land dominion of the 

greater part of Spain, which was formed into two provinces, 
Citerior and Ulterior ; thirdly, the absorption of the previously 
independent state of Syracuse into the Roman province of Sicily j 
fourthly, the setting up of a Roman protectorate over the native 
African tribes ; and fifthly, the full and complete establishment of 
Roman maritime supremacy over the whole of the Western Medi- 
terranean. The war further tended to the greater consolidation of 
the Roman power in Italy. It crushed the last reasonable hopes 
of the Ligurians and Gauls in the north. It riveted their fetters 
more firmly than ever on the non-Latin races of the centre and 
the south, the Umbrians, Etruscans, Sabines, Picentians, Apu- 
lians, Bruttians. Throughout Italy large tracts of land were con- 
fiscated by the sovereign state ; and fresh colonies of Romans and 
Latins were sent out. In Campania and the southern Picenum, 
the whole soil was declared forfeit. The repulse of Hannibal 
involved a second subjugation of Italy, more complete and more 
harsh than the first. Everywhere, except in Latium, the native 
races were depressed, and a Latin dominion was established over 
the length and breadth of the land. 

Note the strengthening of old and the foundation of new colonies at this 
period : — Venusia strengthened in B.C. 200, Narnia in B.C. 199, Cosa in B.C. 197 ; 
Sipontum, Thurii (Gopia), Croton, Salernum, and Puteoli, established in 
B.C. 194; Vibo (Valentia) in B.C. 192. In many places, moreover, where no 
town was built or occupied, the veterans were established on the confiscated 
lands as colo7ii. 

15. Another result of the Hannibalic War, which completed the 
subjugation of the Western Mediterranean basin. Collision 
was to hasten the collision between the aggressive between Rome 
Republic and the East, which had long been evi- and the East, 
dently impending. Already, as early as e.g. 273, Rome had entered 
into friendly relations with Egypt, and even before this she had 
made a commercial treaty with Rhodes (see p. 272). About 



396 ROME. [BOOK v. 

B.C. 345, she had offered to King Ptolemy Euergetes a contingent 
for his Syrian War (see p. 241) i and soon afterwards she inter- 
ceded with Seleucus Callinicus on behalf of the Ilians, her 
^kindred/ Her wars with the Illyrian pirates, B.C. 339 to 319, 
had brought her into contact with the states of Greece, more par- 
ticularly with the ^Etolians (see above, § 7); and finally, the 
alliance of Philip, king of Macedon, with Hannibal, had forced 
her to send a fleet and army across the Adriatic, and had closely 
connected her with Elis, with Sparta, and even with the Asiatic 
kingdom of Pergamus (see pp. 370-1). Circumstances had thus 
drawn her on, without any distinctly ambitious designs on her 
part, to an interference in the affairs of the East — an interference, 
which, in the existing condition of the Oriental world, could not 
but have the most momentous consequences. For throughout the 
East, since the time of Alexander, all things had tended to cor- 
ruption and decay. In Greece, the spirit of patriotism, feebly kept 
alive in the hearts of a select few, such as Aratus and Philopoemen, 
was on the point of expiring. Intestine division made the very 
name of Hellas a mockery, and pointed her out as a ready prey to 
any invader. In Macedonia luxury had made vast strides ; mili- 
tary discipline and training had been neglected; loyalty had 
altogether ceased to exist ; little remained but the inheritance of 
a great name and of a system of tactics which was of small value, 
except under the animating influence of a good general. The 
condition of the other Alexandrine monarchies was even worse. 
In Syria and in Egypt, while the barbarian element had been raised 
but slightly above its natural level by Hellenic influence, the 
Hellenic had suffered greatly by its contact with lower types of 
humanity. The royal races, Seleucids and Ptolemies, were effete 
and degenerate; the armed force that they could bring into the 
field might be numerous, but it was contemptible ; and a general 
of even moderate abilities was a rarity. It was only among the 
purely Asiatic monarchies of the more remote East that any rival, 
really capable of coping with Rome, was now likely to show itself. 
The Macedonian system had lived out its day, and was ready to 
give place to the young, vigorous, and boldly aggressive power 
which had arisen in the West. 

16. The conclusion of peace with Carthage was followed rapidly 
by an attack on Macedonia, for which the conduct of Philip had 
furnished only too many pretexts. Philip had probably lent aid 



PARTI. PEE. IV.] SECOND MACEDONIAN WAR. 397 

to Carthage in her final struggle: he had certainly without any 
provocation commenced an aggressive v/ar against second 
Romeo's ancient ally, Egypt, and he had plunged Macedonian 
also into hostilities with Attalus and the Rho- b.c' 

dians, both of whom were among the friends 200-197. 
of Rome, the former being protected by a treaty (see p. 272)' 
Rome was bound in honour to aid her allies j and no blame 
can attach to her for commencing the Second Macedonian 
War in b.c. 200, and dispatching her troops across the Adriatic. 
Her conduct of the war was at first altogether mediocre ; but 
from the time that T. Quinctius Flamininus took the command 
(B.C. 198) it was simply admirable, and deserved the success which 
attended it. The proclamation of general liberty to the Grecian 
states, while it could not fail of being popular, and was thus 
excellently adapted to deprive Philip of his Hellenic allies, and to 
rally to the Roman cause the whole power of Hellas, involved no 
danger to Roman interests, which were perfectly safe under a 
system that established universal disunion. The gift of liberty to 
the Greeks by Rome in b.c. 198, is parallel to the similar gift of 
universal autonomy to the same people by Sparta and Persia in 
B.C. 387 (see above, p. 187) at the 'Peace of Antalcidas.' On both 
occasions the idea under which the freedom was conceded, was 
that expressed by the maxim ' Divide et impera.' The idea was 
not indeed now carried out to an extreme length. There was no 
dissolution of the leagues of Achsea, ^Etolia, or Boeotia. These 
leagues were in fact too small to be formidable to such a power as 
Rome. And as they had embraced the Roman side during the 
continuance of the war, their dissolution could scarcely be 
insisted on. Thessaly however was, even at this time, in pur- 
suance of the policy of separation, split up into four governments. 

For the details of the Second Macedonian War, and for the terms on which 
peace was concluded, see above, pp. 273-4. 

17. The battle of Cynoscephalae, by which the Second Mace- 
donian War was terminated, deserves a place among the 
' Decisive Battles of the World.' The relative Battle of 
strength of the ' legion ' and the ' phalanx ' was Cynoscephalse, 
then for the first time tried upon a grand scale ; ' ^ '"^^°' ^"*^^' 
and the superiority of the ' legion ' was asserted. No doubt, 
man for man, the Roman soldiers were better than the Mace- 
donian J but it was not this superiority which gained the day. 



398 ROME. [BOOKV. 

The phalanx, as an organisation, was clumsy and unwieldy j 
the legion was light, elastic, adapted to every variety of circum- 
stances. The strength and weakness of the phalanx were never 
better shown than at Cynoscephalse j and its weakness — its inabi- 
lity to form quickly, to maintain its order on uneven ground, or 
to change front — lost the battle. The loss was complete, and 
irremediable. Macedonia was vanquished j and Rome became 
thenceforth the arbitress of the world. 

18. While her arms were thus triumphant in the East, Rome 
was also gaining additional strength in the West. In the very 

War with the y^3,r of the conclusion of peace with Carthage, 
Bon and g^c. ^O], she recommenced hostilities in the plain of 

Insubres 1 -r» 1 1 >— 1 i , 

B.C. the 1*0, where the Gauls had ever since the invasion 

201-191. q£ Hannibal defied the Roman authority and main- 
tained their independence. It was necessary to re-conquer this 
important tract. Accordingly, from b.c. 301 to 191, the Romans 
were engaged in a prolonged Gallic War in this district, in which 
though ultimately successful they suffered many reverses. Their 
garrisons at Placentia and Cremona were completely destroyed 
and swept away. More than one pitched battle was lost. It was 
only by energetic and repeated efforts, and by skilfully fomenting 
the divisions among the tribes, that Rome once more established 
her dominion over this fair and fertile region, forcing the Gauls to 
become her reluctant subjects. 

Details of the War, B.C. 201 to 191. Hostilities commence in the 
country of the Boii, who are assisted by the Carthaginian general, Hamilcar. 
The Romans are defeated, B.C. 201. Sack of Placentia, B.C. 200, and siege 
of Cremona. Hamilcar defeated near that city. Roman army defeated by 
the Insubres, B.C. 199. The Cenomani become allies of the Romans and 
help them to defeat the Insubres on the Mincius, B.C. 197. Fall of Comum, 
B.C. 196. Peace made with the Insubres. War continues with the Boii, 
B.C. 195 to 191. Great Roman victory of Mutina, B.C. 193. Submission of 
the Boii, who cede one-half of their territory, B.C. 191. 

19. The conquest of Gallia Cisalpina was followed by a fresh 
arrangement of the territory. The line of the Po was taken as 

Result of that which should bound the strictly Roman posses- 
the War. sions, and while ^ Gallia Transpadana ' was relin- 
quished to the native tribes, with the exception of certain strategic 
points, such as Cremona and Aquileia, '^Gallia Cispadana' was 
incorporated absolutely into Italy. The colonies of Placentia and 
Cremona were re-established and re-organised. New foundations 
were made at Bononia (Bologna), Mutina (Modena), and Parma in 



PABT I. PEE. IV.] WAR WITH ANTIOCHUS. 399 

the Boian country. The -^milian Way was carried on (B.C. 187) 
from Ariminum to Placentia. The Boians and Lingones were 
rapidly and successfully Latinized. Beyond the Po^ the Gallic 
communities, though allowed to retain their existence and their 
native governments, and even excused from the payment of any 
tribute to their conquerors, were regarded as dependent upon 
Rome, and were especially required to check the incursions of the 
Alpine or Transalpine Celts, and to allow no fresh immigrants to 
settle on the southern side of the mountain-chain. 

30. Meanwhile, in the East, the defeat of Philip^ the withdrawal 
of the Romans, and the restoration of the Greeks to freedom, had 
been far from producing tranquillity. The ^tolian 
robber-community was dissatisfied with the awards g^^te oi 
of Flamininus, and hoped, in the scramble that Greece and 

. . r ^^ . . ^ . the East. 

might tollow a new war, to gain an increase of terri- 
tory. Antiochus of Syria was encouraged by the weakness of 
Macedon to extend his dominions in Asia Minor, and even to 
effect a lodgment in Europe, pmceedings which Rome could 
scarcely look upon with indifference. War broke out in Greece 
in the very year that Flamininus quitted it, B.C. 194, by the 
intrigues of the ^tolians, who were bent on creating a disturb- 
ance. At the same time Antiochus showed more and more that 
he did not fear to provoke the Romans, and was quite willing to 
measure his strength against theirs, if occasion offered. In 
B.C. 195 he received Hannibal at his court with special honours; 
and soon afterwards he entered into negotiations, which had it for 
their object to unite Macedonia, Syria, and Carthage against the 
common foe. In b.c. 194 or 193 he contracted an alliance with 
the vEtolians; and finally, in b.c. 192, he proceeded with a force 
of 10,500 men from Asia into Greece. 

21. This movement of Antiochus had been foreseen by the 
Romans, who about the same time landed on the coast of Epirus 
with a force of 25,000 men. War was thus, practi- Y/ar of Rome 
cally, declared on both sides. The struggle was, with Antiochus 
directly and immediately, for the protectorate of g.c. ' 

Greece; indirectly and prospectively, for political 192-190, 
ascendancy. Antiochus ' the Great/ as he was called, the master 
of all Asia from the valley of the Indus to the ^Egean, thought 
himself quite competent to meet and defeat the upstart power 
which had lately ventured to intermeddle in the affairs of the 



400 ROME. [book v. 

' Successors of Alexander/ Narrow-minded and ignorant, he 
despised his adversary, and took the field with a force absurdly 
small, which he could without difficulty have quadrupled. The 
natural result followed. Rome easily defeated him in a pitched 
battle, drove him across the sea, and following him rapidly into his 
own country, shattered his power, and established her own prestige 
Great victory in Asia, by the great victory of Magnesia, which 
of Magnesia, placed the Syrian empire at her mercy. Most fortu- 
nate was it for Rome that the sceptre of Syria was at this time 
wielded by so weak a monarch. Had the occupant of the Seleucid 
throne possessed moderate capacity j had he made a proper use of 
his opportunities j had he given the genius of Hannibal, which 
was placed at his disposal^ full scope j had he, by a frank and 
generous policy, attached Philip of Macedon to his side, the ambi- 
tious Republic might have been checked in mid career, and have 
suffered a repulse from which there would have been no recovery 
for centuries. 

Details of the War with Antiochus, B.C. 192 to 190. Antiochus lands 
at Demetrias, B.C. 192, but with only 10,000 foot, 500 horse, and six elephants. 
He is made Genei-al-in-Chief of the ^tolians. The Athamanians, Chalcis in 
Euboea, Elis, and Boeotia join him. Epirus negotiates. Philip, offended at 
the encouragement given by Antiochus to a pretender to the Macedonian 
crown, declares for the Romans. The Romans, with 40,000 men, enter 
Thessaly, B.C. 191, and advance southwards. Antiochus occupies Thermo- 
pylae with his small force, and gives the guard of the path over the mountains 
to the iEtolians, who are easily dislodged, whereupon the whole army of 
Antiochus breaks up and flies in disorder. He himself returns to Asia and 
assumes an attitude of defence. His partisans in Greece are forced to sub- 
mit either to Philip or to the Romans. At sea, his fleet is defeated by the 
Romans near Cyprus in Ionia. Struggle for the mastery of the ^gean 
between the Romans, Pergamenes, and Rhodians on the one hand, and Anti- 
ochus, assisted by Hannibal, on the other, B.C. 190. Contest decided by the 
defeat of Hannibal at Aspendus, and of Polyxenidas, the admiral of Anti- 
ochus, at Corycus. The Roman army, under the command of the two 
Scipios, lands in Asia. Attempt of Antiochus to negotiate fails. Battle of 
Magnesia decides the war. Antiochus cedes Asia Minor north of the Taurus 
and consents to pay the sum of 12,000 talents (nearly 3,000,000/. sterling). 

22. The 'moderation' of Rome after the battle of Magnesia 

has been admired by many historians; and it is certainly true 

Results of that she did not acquire by her victory a single inch 

the victory. Qf fresh territory, nor any direct advantage beyond 

the enrichment of the State treasury. But indirectly the advantages 

which she gained were considerable. She was able to reward her 

allies, Eumenes of Pergamus and the Rhodians, in such a way as 

to make it apparent to the whole East that the Roman alliance was 

highly profitable. She was able to establish, and she did establish. 



PAET I. PER. IV.] WAH WITH ANTIOCHUS. 401 

on the borders of Macedonia, a great and powerful state, a counter- 
poise to the only enemy which she now feared in Europe. She 
was able to obtain a cheap renown by proclaiming once more the 
liberty of Greece, and insisting that the Greek cities of Asia 
Minor, or at any rate those which had lent her aid, should be 
recognised as free — a proclamation which cost her nothing, and 
whereby she secured herself a body of friends on whose services 
she might hereafter count in this quarter. That she was content 
with these gains, that she evacuated Asia Minor, as she had 
previously evacuated Greece (see § 20), was probably owing to 
the fact that she was not as yet prepared to occupy, and main- 
tain her dominion over, countries so far distant from Rome. She 
had found the difficulty of holding even Spain as a part of her 
empire, and was forced by the perpetual attacks of the unconquered 
and revolts of the conquered natives to maintain there perpetually 
an army of 40,000 men. She had not yet made up her mind to 
annex even Greece ; much less, therefore, could she think of hold- 
ing the remote Asia Minor. It was sufficient for her to have 
repulsed a foe who had ventured to advance to her doors, to have 
increased her reputation by two glorious campaigns and a great 
victory, and to have paved the way for a future occupation of 
Western Asia, if circumstances should ever render it politic. 

The chief benefit which Asia Minor derived from this premature entrance 
into it of the Roman arms was through the campaign of Cn. Manlius Volso 
(B.C. 189) against the Gauls or Galatians. The losses inflicted on the two 
tribes of the ToHstoboii and the Tectosagi secured tranquillity to the neigh- 
bouring nations for a long term of years. But the motive of Manlius seems 
to have been plunder. 

33. In Greece, the defeat of Antiochus was followed, neces- 
sarily, by the submission of the T^tolians, who were mulcted in 
large portions of their territory and made to pay a state of 
heavy fine. Rome annexed to her own dominions Greece, 
only Cephallenia and Zacynthus, distributing the rest among her 
allies, who, however, were very far from being satisfied. The 
Achsean League and Philip were both equally displeased at the 
limits that were set to their ambition, and were ready, should 
opportunity offer, to turn their arms against their recent ally. 

24. In the West, four wars continued to occupy a good deal of 
the Roman attention, {a) Spain was still far from Wars of Rome 
subdued ; and the Roman forces in the country were ^'^ ^^ ^^^*- 
year after year engaged against the Lusitani or the Celtiberi, with 

Dd 



402 ROME. Xbook v. 

very doubtful success, until about B.C. i8i to 178, when some 
decided advantages were gained, {b) In the mountainous Liguria 
the freedom-loving tribes showed the same spirit which has con- 
stantly been exhibited by mountaineers, as by the Swiss, the 
Circassians, and others. War raged in this region from b.c. 193 
to 170 j and the Roman domination over portions of the Western 
Apennines and the maritime Alps was only with the utmost diffi- 
culty established by the extirpation of the native races or their 
transplantation to distant regions. No attempt was made really 
to subjugate the entire territory. It was viewed as a training- 
school for the Roman soldiers and officers, standing to Rome very 
much as Circassia long stood to Russia, and as Algeria even now 
stands to France, {c) In Sardinia, and [d) in Corsica perpetual 
wars, resembling slave-hunts, were waged with the native races 
of the interior, especially in the interval from B.C. 181 to 173. 

25. The discontent of Philip (see § 23) did not lead him to any 
rash or imprudent measures. He defended his interests^ so far as 

Relations of "^^^ possible, by negotiations. When Rome insisted, 
Rome with he yielded. But all the while, he was nursing the 
during the Strength of Macedonia, recruiting her finances, 
^^f pvr^^ increasing the number of her allies, making every 
B. c. ' possible preparation for a renewal of the struggle, 
190-179. which had gone so much against him at Cynos- 
cephalae. Rome suspected him, but had not the face to declare 
actual war against so recent an ally and so complaisant a subordi- 
nate. She contented herself with narrowing his dominions, 
strengthening Eumenes against him^ and sowing dissensions in his 
family. Demetrius, his younger son, who lived at Rome as a 
hostage, was encouraged to raise his thoughts to the throne, which 
he was given to understand Rome would gladly see him occupy. 
Whether Demetrius was willing to become a 'cat's-paw' is not 
apparent ; but the Roman intrigues on his behalf certainly brought 
about his death, and caused the reign of Philip to end in sorrow 
and remorse, b.c. 179. (See above, p. 5^75.) 

26, The accession of Perseus to the Macedonian throne was 
Position and ^nly SO far a gain for Rome that he was less com- 

plans of petent than Philip to conduct a great enterprise. 

B.C. ' In many respects the position of Macedonia was 

179-172. bettered by the change of sovereigns. Perseus, a 

young and brave prince, was popular, not only among his own 



PAET I. PER. IV.] THIRD MACEDONIAN WAR. 403 

subjects, but throughout Greece, where the national party had 
begun to see that independence was an impossible dream, and that 
the choice really lay between subjection to the wholly foreign 
Romans and to the semi-Hellenic and now thoroughly hellenized 
Macedonians. Perseus, again, had no personal enemies. The kings 
of Syria and Egypt, who could not forgive his father the wrongs 
which they had suffered at his hands, had no quarrel with the 
present monarch j to whom the former (Seleucus IV) readily gave 
his daughter in marriage. The design of Philip to re-establish Mace- 
donia in a position of real independence was heartily adopted by his 
successor • and Rome learnt by every act of the new prince, that 
she had to expect shortly an outbreak of hostilities in this quarter. 

27. Yet, for a while, she procrastinated. Her wars with 
Liguria, Sardinia, and Corsica still gave her occupation in the 
West, while a new enemy, the Istri, provoked by the ^y^xA 
establishment of her colony of Aquileia (b.c. 183), Macedonian 
caused her constant trouble and annoyance in the commences, 
border land between Italy and Macedon, the Upper ^- '^- ^'^^• 
Illyrian country. But, about b.c. 172, it became clear that further 
procrastination would be fatal to her interests — would, in fact, be 
equivalent to the withdrawal of all further interference with the 
affairs of Greece and the East. Perseus was becoming daily bolder 
and more powerful. His party among the Greeks was rapidly in- 
creasing. The ^tolians called in his aid. The Boeotians made an 
alliance with him. Byzantium and Lampsacus placed themselves 
under his protection. Even the Rhodians paid him honour and 
observance. If the protectorate of Greece was not to slip from 
the hands of Rome and to be resumed by Macedon, it was high 
time that Rome should take the field and vindicate her pretensions 
by force of arms. Accordingly, in the autumn of b.c. 172, an 
embassy was sent to Perseus, with demands wherewith it was im- 
possible that he should comply ; and when the envoys were 
abruptly dismissed, war was at once declared. 

For the details of the Third Macedonian War, and the causes of the ill 
success of Perseus, see above, Book IV, Period III, Part III (pp. 276, 277). 

28. The victory of Pydna, gained by L. ^milius Paullus 
(June 22, B.C. 168), was a repetition of that at important 
Cynoscephalae, but had even more important conse- results of the 
quences. Once more the legion showed itself 

superior to the phalanx j but now the phalanx was not merely 

D d 2 



404 ROME. [book v. 

defeated but destroyed, and with it fell the monarchy which had 
invented it and by its means attained to greatness. Nor was this 
the whole. Not only did the kingdom of Alexander perish at 
Pydna, 144 years after his death, but the universal dominion of 
Rome over the civilised world was thereby finally established. 
The battle of Pydna was the last occasion upon which a civilised 
foe contended on something like equal terms with Rome for a 
separate and independent existence. All the wars in which Rome 
was engaged after this were either rebellions, aggressive wars 
upon barbarians with a view to conquest, or defensive wars 
against the barbarians who from time to time assailed her. The 
victories of Zama_, Magnesia, and Pydna convinced all the world 
but the ' outer barbarians ' that it was in vain to struggle against 
Roman ascendancy, that safety was only to be found in submission 
and obedience. Hence the progress of Rome from this time was, 
comparatively speaking, peaceful. Her successes had now reduced 
the whole civilised world to dependence. When it was her 
pleasure to exchange dependence for actual incorporation into her 
empire, she had simply to declare her will, and was, generally, 
unresisted. Occasionally, indeed, the state marked out for absorp- 
tion, would in sheer despair take up arms : e. g. Achaea, Carthage, 
Judaea. But for the most part there was no struggle, merely sub- 
mission. Greece (except Achaea), Macedonia, Asia Minor, Syria, 
Egypt, were annexed peaceably ; and the only remaining great 
war of the Republic was with the barbarian, Mithridates of 
Pontus. 

29. But Rome, though her military successes had elevated her 
to this commanding position, was still loth to undertake the 
Settlement ^-Ctual government of the countries over which she 
made of the had established her ascendancy. Her experiment in 
Spain was not encouraging j and she would willingly 
have obtained the advantages of a widely-extended sway, without 
its drawbacks of enlarged responsibilities and ever-recurring difficul- 
ties and entanglements. Accordingly, her policy was still to leave 
the conquered regions to rule themselves, but at the same time so 
to weaken them by separation, that they might never more be 
formidable, and so to watch over, and direct, their proceedings 
that these might in no way clash with the notions which she 
entertained of her own interests. Moreover, as she saw no reason 
why she should not obtain permanent pecuniary advantage from 



PART I. PER. IV.] SETTLEMENT OF GREECE. 405 

her victories, she determined to take from both Illyricum and 
Macedonia a land-tax equal to one-half of the amount which had 
been previously exacted by the native sovereigns. 

Settlement of the Hellenic Peninsula. («) Macedonia was disarmed 
and broken up into four separate states, without rights of intermarriage or of 
acquiring land within each other's territories. Each of the four states was 
a federative republic (see p. 277). The Royal demesnes and the right of 
working the mines (a royal prerogative) were assumed by Rome ; and the 
land-tax was commuted into an annual payment to Rome of 100 talents. 
{b') Illyria was divided into three small states. Certain cities which had favoured 
Rome were exempted from taxation. The rest of the country was taxed at 
the rate of half of the former land-tax. The entire Illyrian fleet was declared 
forfeit, and was presented to the Greek towns on the coast, (c) In Greece, 
the treatment of the several states varied considerably. The -S^tolians were 
deprived of Amphipolis, and the Acarnanians of Leucas ; Epirus was ravaged, 
150,000 of the inhabitants sold into slavery, and the rest of the population 
delivered over to the government of a tyrant. All the leagues, except that of 
Achsea, were dissolved ; and each city was made independent. The members 
of the patriotic party in the various states were accused of having favoured 
Perseus, in act or thought, and were either executed or deported to Italy. 
Even Achsea, which had been the faithful ally of Rome throughout the 
struggle, was required to deliver up for trial a thousand of her chief men, who 
were thenceforward detained in Roman prisons as hostages for her good 
behaviour. 

30. While, however, professedly leaving the countries which she 
had conquered to govern themselves, Rome could not bring her- 
self really to let them act as they pleased. What she j^^^^ 

did was to substitute for government a system of sur- system of 

• 11 T- 1 1 i-n J- commissioners. 

veillance. iiverywhere she was contmually sending 
commissioners {legatt)^ who not merely kept her acquainted with 
all that passed in the states, which they visited, but actively inter- 
fered with the course of government, suggesting certain proceedings 
and forbidding others, acting as referees in all quarrels between 
state and state, giving their decisions in the name of Rome, and 
threatening her vengeance on the recalcitrant. 

31. The subjugation of the enemies of Rome was always 
followed by a tendency on her part to quarrel with her friends. 
Her friends were maintained and strengthened ^^.^^^.^ , r 
merely as counterpoises to some foe ; and when the Pergamus 
foe ceased to exist or to be formidable, the friends 

were no longer needed. Thus the fall of Macedonia and complete 
prostration of Greece produced an immediate coolness between 
Rome and her chief Eastern allies, Pergamus and Rhodes. 

The statement that Eumenes had thoughts of joining Perseus against Rome, 
and even entered into negotiations with him, seems quite unworthy of credit. 
The coolness certainly began with Rome, and arose from her no longer 



4o6 ROME. [book v. 

needing Eumenes. Hence her intrigues with his brother Attains, B.C. 167; 
her rejection of his request for CEnus and Maroneia ; her refusal to admit, 
him to an audience, B.C. 166 ; and her grant of independence to Pamphylia, 
which was disputed between him and Antiochus. 

The Rhodians offended Rome by an offer to mediate between her and 
Perseus, B.C. 168 ; but there is reason to believe that the Roman consul him- 
self urged them to make the offer. Having fallen into the trap, they were 
punished by the loss of all their possessions upon the mainland, by serious 
interferences with their trade, and by the establishment of a free port at 
Delos, which greatly diminished their commercial gains. 

32. The vast prestige which Rome acquired by the victory of 

Pydna is strikingly shown by the fact that she was able in the 

same year to deprive Antiochus Epiphanes of the 

Interference r -j. r n 1 • t' ^- l 

between Syria fruits of all his Egyptian successes, by a mere 

and E^t, command haughtily issued by her commissioner, 
B.C. 168. t> ] ] 5 

Popillius. (See above, pp. %i^ and 246.) Antiochus 

withdrew from Egypt when he was on the point of conquering it ; 

and even relinquished the island of Cyprus to his antagonist. 

Rome allowed him, however, to retain possession of Coele-Syria 

and Palestine. 

Q^^, The pacification of the East was followed by another of 

those pauses, which occur from time to time in the history 

of the Roman Republic, after a great effort has 

wars from been made and a great success attained, when the 

B.C. government appears to have been undecided as to its 

168-150. ^ ^^ 

next step. Eighteen years intervene between the 

close of the Third Macedonian and the commencement of the 
Third Punic War — eighteen years, during which Rome was en- 
gaged in no contest of the least importance, unless it were that 
which continued to be waged in Spain against the Lusitanians 
and a few other native tribes. She did not, indeed, ever cease to 
push her dominion in some quarter. In the intervals between her 
great wars, she almost always prosecuted some petty quarrels ; and 
this was the case in the interval between b.c. 168 and 150, when 
she carried on hostilities with several insignificant peoples, as the 
Celtic tribes, in the Alpine valleys, the Ligurians of the tract 
bordering on Nicaea (Nice) and Antipolis (Antibes), the Dalma- 
tians, the Corsicans, and others. 

Important successes of C. Sulpicius Gallus against the Eastern Ligurians 
and of his colleague M. Claudius Marcellus against the Celts in the Alps, 
B.C. 166. War in Corsica, B.C. 163 to 162. War with the Dalmatians, 
B.C. 156 to 155. War with the Western Ligurians, B.C. 154. War with the 
Celtiberians and Lusitanians, B.C. 153 to 150. 

34. But the time came when the government was no longer 



PABT I. PER. IV.] THIRD PUNIC WAR. 40-7 

content with these petty and trivial enterprises. After eighteen 
years of irresolution, it was decided to take import- change of 
ant matters in hand — to remove out of the way policy. 

., . 1-11 1 1 -11 ^ 1 Determination 

the City which, however reduced, was still felt to to extend the 
be Rome's sole rival in the Western world, and empire. 
to assume the actual government of a new dependancy in a new 
continent. The determination to destroy Carthage and to form 
Africa into a province, was in no way forced upon Rome by cir- 
cumstances, but was decided upon after abundant deliberation by 
the predominant party in the state, as the course best calculated 
to advance Roman interests. The grounds of quarrel with Car- 
thage were miserably insufficient; and the tyranny of the stronger 
was probably never exerted in a grosser or more revolting form, 
than when Rome required that Carthage, which had observed, and 
more than observed, every obligation whereto she was bound in 
treaty, should nevertheless, for the greater advantage of Rome, 
cease to exist. It was not to be expected that the idea of a 
political suicide would approve itself to the Carthaginian govern- 
ment. But less than this would not content Rome, which, 
having first secured every possible advantage from the incli- 
nation of her adversary to make sacrifices for peace, revealed 
finally a requirement that could not be accepted without war. 

35. The Third Punic War lasted four years — from b.c. 149 to 
146 inclusive. It was a struggle into which Carthage entered 
purely from a feeling of despair, because the terms , . , 

offered to her — the destruction of the city, and the Punic War, 
removal of the people to an inland situation — were i49_!i46- 
such that death seemed preferable to them. The absorption of 
resistance made was gallant and prolonged, though 
at no time was there any reasonable hope of success. Cajrthage 
was without ships without allies, almost without arms, since she 
had recently surrendered armour and weapons for 200,000 men. 
Yet she maintained the unequal fight for four years, exhibiting a 
valour and an inventiveness worthy of her best days. At length, 
in B.C. 146, the Romans under Scipio iEmilianus, forced their way 
into the town, took it almost house by house, fired it in all direc- 
tions, and ended by levelling it with the ground. The Cartha- 
ginian territory was then made into the '^ province' of 'Africa;' a 
land-tax and poll-tax were imposed ; and the seat of government 
was fixed at Utica. 



4o8 ROME. [book v. 

-The utter destruction of Carthage was parallel to that of Veii in B.C. 393, 
of Corinth in the same year with Carthage, and of Jerusalem, a.d. 70. Rome 
was unwilling that there should anywhere exist a city which could be viewed 
as rivalling her in size, wealth or splendour. It is impossible that she could 
have really feared anything from the power of Carthage. 

^6. During the continuance of the Carthaginian War, troubles 
broke out in the Hellenic peninsula, which enabled Rome to pur- 
Macedonian sue in that quarter also the new policy of annexation 
andAchsean ^^^ absorption. A pretender, who gave out that he 
Macedonia was the son of Perseus, raised the standard of revolt 
""be^mf'' in Macedonia, defeated the Romans in a pitched 
'provinces.' battle, B.C. 149, and invaded Thessaly, but was iij 
the following year himself defeated and made prisoner by Metellus. 
The opportunity was at once taken of reducing Macedonia into 
the form of a 'province.' At the same time, without even any 
tolerable pretext, a quarrel was picked with the Achsean League, 
B.C. 148, which was required to dissolve itself. A brief war 
followed (see above, p. ^79), which was terminated by Mummius, 
who plundered and destroyed Corinth, b.c. 146. Achaea was then 
practically added to the empire, though she was still allowed for 
some years to amuse herself with some of the old forms of free- 
dom, from which all vital force had departed. 

37. But while Rome was thus extending herself in the South 

and in the East, and adding new provinces to her empire, in her 

old provinces of the West her authority was fiercely 

in Spain, disputed j and it was with the utmost difficulty that 

^•c- she maintained herself in possession. The native 

149-133. ^ 

tribes of the Spanish peninsula were brave and free- 
dom-loving; their country was strong and easy of defence; and 
Rome found it almost impossible to subjugate them. The Roman 
dominion had indeed never yet been established in the more 
northern and western portions of the country, which were held by 
the Lusitani, the Galljeci, the Vaccaei, and the Cantabri ; and a 
perpetual border war was consequently maintained, in which the 
Roman armies were frequently worsted. The gallantry and high 
spirit of the natives was especially shown from b.c. 149 to 140 
under the leadership of the Lusitanian, Viriathus; and again 
from B.C. 143 to 133, in the course of the desperate r-esistance 
offered to the Roman arms by the Numantians. Rome was 
unable to overcome either enemy without having recourse to 
treachery. 



PART I. PER. IV.] WAJ^S IN SPAIN. 409 

Details of the War in Spain, from B.C. 149 to 133. The Lusitani 
invade Turditania, B.C. 149. Viriathus being made general, extricates them 
from a perilous position, and defeats the praetor, Vetilius. For five years 
(B.C. 149 to 145) he continues the struggle with uniform success. In B.C. 145, 
the consul, Fabius Maximus -S^milianus, undertakes the war and defeats him ; 
but he gains over most of the Celtiberians and becomes more powerful than 
ever. In B.C. 142, Viriathus was first defeated by, and then victorious over, Ser- 
vilianus, the adopted brother of .^milianus, after which he obtained a peace on 
fair terms, which was ratified by the Senate, B.C. 141. This peace, however, 
the Romans broke in the ensuing year, B.C. 140, when the consul, Servilius 
Caepio, first attacked Viriathus with his troops and then procured his assassina- 
tion. The Lusitani, upon this, submitted ; but the Numantians, who had the 
year before completely defeated the consul, Q^ Pompeius, continued the 
struggle with success, gaining victories over the pro-consul, Popillius, in 
B.C. 138, and over the consul, Hostilius Mancinus, in B.C. 137. On the second 
of these occasions a peace was made, which saved a Roman army of 20,000 
men. But, as after the Caudine Forks, Rome repudiated her engagements. 
"War was renewed in B.C. 136, but with little success, the pro-consul, Lepidus, 
suffering a severe defeat. Calpurnius Piso, in B.C. 135, effected nothing. At 
last, in B.C. 134, the war was undertaken by Scipio African us ^Emilianus, who 
so improved the discipline of the Roman forces, that in the following year, 
B.C. 133, he succeeded in bringing the war to an end by starving out the 
Numantians, who fired their city and then slew themselves, rather than fall 
into the hands of the Romans. 

38. While the freedom-loving tribes of the West showed so 

much reluctance to surrender their liberties into the hands of 

Rome, in the East her dominion received a large 

extension by the voluntary act of one of her allies, the kingdom 

Attalus III, king of Pergamus, who held under his °^ Pergamus, 

' ^ & 3 B.C. 133. 

sovereignty the greater part of Asia Minor, was found 
at his death (b.c. 133) to have left his kingdom by will to the Ro- 
man people. This strange legacy was, as was natural, disputed by 
the expectant heir, Aristonicus, bastard son of Attalus, and was 
afterwards denied by Mithridates V; but there is no real ground 
for calling it in question. Rome had no doubt intrigued to obtain 
the cession, and consequently she did not hesitate to accept it. 
A short war with Aristonicus (b.c. 133 to 130) gave the Romans 
full possession of the territory, the greater portion of which was 
formed into a province ; Phrygia Major being, however, detached, 
and ceded to Mithridates IV, king of Pontus, who had assisted 
Rome in the brief struggle. 

The territory of Rome at this time included, besides all Italy up to the 
Alps, the ' provinces ' (^pro-vincicB =pro'videnti<B, i. e. ' cares ' or * charges ') of 
Hispania Ulterior and Hispania Citerior, of Africa (the old ^ 
territory of Carthage), of Sicily, and of Sardinia and Corsica, svstem of 
in the West ; and in the East, of Macedonia, Achaia, and , provinces : ' 
Asia, or the absorbed portion of the kingdom of Pergamus. j^g tendency. 
Gallia Cisalpina and Liguria were also 'provinces.' Each 
province was administered by a governor, who was either a 'pro-consul,' a 
* praetor,' or a ' pro-praetor.' These governors received no stipend, but were 



4IO ROME. [book V. 

entitled to certain contributions from the provincials for the support of them- 
selves and their court, and might also receive voluntary gifts — two fertile 
sources of abuse and misgovernment. Their suite or court {cohors) consisted 
of a certain number of quaestors, of secretaries, notaries, lictors, augurs, 
public criers, &c. They had at once the chief civil authority and the military 
command in their provinces. They were irremovable during their term of 
office, which might be prolonged from year to year ; nor could any complaint 
be brought against them till their office was at an end. If serious complaints 
were then made, they could be brought to trial, either criminally before the 
people, or by civil action before judges chosen from among the senators. In 
neither case, however, was there much chance of condemnation ; and in the 
latter, the condemnation could be nothing but a fine, which was easily paid 
by the extortionate governor, who would often remain after it one of the richest 
men in Rome. It is evident that this system must have been grievously oppres- 
sive to the provincials, and fearfully corruptive of public morals at Rome. 

39. The internal changes in the Roman government during the 
period here under consideration were gentle_, gradual, and for the 

Changes in niost part informal j but they amounted in course of 
the Roman time to a Sensible and far from unimportant modifi- 
at this time cation. The long struggle between the Patrician 
gradual. ^.xiA Plebeian orders was terfliinated by the Genucian 
revolution ^ and, the chief Plebeian families being now placed on 
a par with the Patricians, a united nobility stood at the head of 
the nation, confronting and confronted by a proletariate, with 
only a rather small and not very active middle class intervening 
between them. The proletariate, however, was in part amenable 
to the nobility, being composed of persons who were its Clients ; 
and it was not difficult to keep the remaining members in good 
humour by bestowing upon them from time to time allotments of 
land in the conquered territories. On the whole, it may be said 
that the proletariate was, during this period, at the beck and call 
of the nobles, while the only opposition which caused them 
anxiety was that of the middle class— Italian farmers principally — 
who, supported by some of the less distinguished Plebeian ' houses,' 
formed an ' opposition,' which was sometimes formidable. 

40. It was the object of the nobles, (i) to increase the power of 
the Senate as compared with the ' comitia ;' and (2) to bring the 

Exaltation of 'comitia' themselves under aristocratic influence, 
the Senate, -pj^g exaltation of the Senate was effected very gra- 
dually. The more important foreign affairs became — and every- 
thing was foreign out of Italy — the greater grew to be the power of 
the Senate, which settled all such matters without reference to the 
' comitia.' And, with respect to home affairs, the more widely the 
franchise was extended (and it reached through the Roman colo- 



PAST I. PEB. IV.] CHANGES IN THE CONSTITUTION. 411 

nies to very remote parts of Italy), the more numerous and varied 
the elements that were admitted to it, the less were the ' comitia ' 
possessed of any distinct and positive will, and the more easy did 
it become to manipulate and manage them. As a rule_, the people 
stood and assented to all proposals made by the magistrates. 
They were too widely scattered over the territory to be instructed 
beforehand, too numerous to be addressed effectively at the time 
of voting — besides which, no one but the presiding magistrate had 
the right of addressing them. 

41. To bring the 'comitia' more completely under the hands of 
the government, the vast bodies of freedmen, who constituted at 
this time the chief portion of the retainers icllentes) 

'■ ^ ' Corruption 

of each noble house, were continually admitted to of the 
the franchise, either by a positive enactment, as comitia. 
in B. c. 340, or by the carelessness or collusion of the censors, who 
every five years made out anew the roll of the citizens. The 
lower classes of the independent voters were also systematically 
corrupted by the practice of largesses, especially distributions of 
corn, and by the exhibition of games at the private cost of the 
magistrates, who curried favour with the voters by the splendour 
and expense of their shows. It was also perhaps to increase the 
influence of the nobles over the centuries that the change was 
made by which each of the five classes was assigned an equal 
number of votes ; for the wealthier citizens not within the noble 
class were at this time the most independent and the most likely 
to thwart the will of the government. 

42. Still, no hard-and-fast line was drawn between the nobles 
and the rest of the community, no barrier which could not be 
overstepped. A family became noble through its Rome falls 
members obtaining any of the high offices of the practically 

_ 11 1 • 1 1 • , • r under the 

State, and through its thus having ' images of ances- rule of a 
tors ' to show. And legally the highest office was clique, 
open to every citizen. Practically, however, the chief offices came 
to be confined almost to a clique. This was owing, in the first 
place, to the absolute need of great wealth for certain offices, as 
especially the sedileship, and to the law (passed in B.C. 180) by 
which a regular rotation of offices was fixed, and no one could 
reach the higher till he had first served the lower. But, beyond 
this, it is evident that after a time a thoroughly exclusive spirit 
grew up ; and all the influence of the nobles over the ' comitia ' was 



413 ROME. [book v. 

exerted to keep out of high office every ' new man ' — every one, 
that is, who did not belong to the narrow list of some forty or 
fifty ^ houses ' who considered it their right to rule the common- 
wealth. 

See the work of Ruperti, Stemmata gentium Romanarum. Gottingen, 
1795; 8vo. 

43. The attempts of the ' opposition ' (see § 39) were limited to 

two kinds of efforts. First, they vainly wasted their strength in 

noble but futile efforts to check the spread of luxury 

narrow policy ^^^ corruption, including however under those harsh 

oft^^ , names much that modern society would regard as 

' opposition. ..... T r- 1-1 111 

proper civilisation and refinement. Secondly, they 
now and then succeeded by determined exertions in raising to 
high office a ' new man ' — a Porcius Cato, or a C. Flaminius — 
who was a thorn in the side of the nobles during the remainder of 
his lifetime, but rarely effected any political change of import- 
ance. Altogether, the 'opposition' seems fairly taxable with 
narrow views and an inability to grapple with the difficulties 
of the situation. The age was one of apolitical mediocrities.' 
Intent on pursuing their career of conquest abroad, the Roman 
people cared little and thought little of affairs at home. The 
State drifted into difficulties, which were unperceived and un- 
suspected, till they suddenly declared themselves with startling 
violence at the epoch whereat we have now arrived. 

By far the best account of the internal condition of Rome at this period, 
which has been strangely neglected by most writers of Roman history, will be 
found in the Romische Geschichte of MoMMSEN, book iii, chaps, xi. and xii. 



FIFTH PERIOD. 

From the Commencement of internal Troubles under the Gracchi to the 
Establishment of the Empire under Augustus, B.C. 133 to a.d. 30. 

Sources. The continuous histories of this period, composed by ancient 
writers, whether Greek or Latin, if we except mere sketches and epitomes, 
are all lost. For the earlier portion of it — B.C. 133 to 70 — our materials are 
especially scanty. Plutarch, in his Lives of the Gracchi, of Marius, Sylla, 
Lucullus, Crassus, and Sertorius, and APPIAN, De Bel/is Civilibus, are the chief 
authorities; to which may be added Sallust's Jugurtha, a brilliant and 
valuable monograph, together with a few fragments of his Histories. In this 
comparative scarcity of sources, even the brief compendium of the prejudiced 
Paterculus, and the Epitomes of the careless and inaccurate LiVY, come to 
have an importance. From about B.C. 70, there is an improvement both in the 



PART I. PER. v.] CIVIL TROUBLES. 413 

amount and in the character of the extant materials. Appian continues to be 
of service, as also does Plutarch in his Lives of Cicero, Pompey, Julius Ceesar, 
Cato the younger, Brutus, and Antonius ; while we obtain, in addition, abundant 
information of the most authentic kind, first, from the contemporary Speeches 
and Letters of CiCERO, and then from the CAommentaries of CJESAR and 
HiRTius. The continuous narrative of Dio Cassius begins also from the 
year B.C. 69 ; the Catiline of Sallust belongs to the years B.C. 66 to 62 ; and 
Suetonius' Lives of Julius and Octavius fall, the one entirely, the other 
partially, within the date which terminates the period. 

Among modern works wholly or specially devoted to this period of Roman 
History may be mentioned — 

De BrosSES, Histoire de la Republique Romaine dans le cours du Tieme Siecle, 
Dijon, 1777; 3 vols. 4to. (Translated into German, with additions, by 
Schleuter, in 1790.) 

Long, G., Decline of the Roman Republic. London, 1864; 2 vols. 8vo. 
A careful collection of facts, embracing an unusually small amount of theory. 
(This work belongs in part to the preceding period ; since it commences with 
the history of B.C. 154, and contains an account of the wars in Spain with 
Viriathus and the Numantians, and of the contemporary civil history.) 

Drumann, W., Geschichte Roms in seinem Uebergange von der Republik zur 
Monarchic. Konigsberg, 1834-44; 6 vols. 8vo. 

Lau, Th., Die Gracchen und ihre Zeit ; Hamburg, 1854; 8vo ; and the 
same author's Cornelius Sulla, eine Biographic ; Hamburg, 1855 ; 8vo. 

NiTZSCH, K. W., Die Gracchen und ihre Vorg'dnger. Berlin, 1847 ; 8vo. 

I. An epoch is now reached at which the foreign wars of Rome 
become few and unimportant, while the internal affairs of the 
State have once more a grave and absorbing interest. ^ . 
Civil troubles and commotions follow one another character of 
with great rapidity j and finally we come to a Time^o"civil 
period when the arms of the Romans are turned trouble and 

, , , , _ , 11 disturbance. 

against themselves, and the conquerors of the world 
engage in civil wars of extraordinary violence. The origin of 
these disturbances is to be found in the gulf which had been 
gradually forming and widening between the poor and the rich, 
the nobles and the proletariate. For a long series of years, from 
the termination of the Second Samnite War to the final settle- 
ment of Northern Italy (b.c. 303 to 177), the pressure of poverty 
had been continually kept down and alleviated, partly by the 
long and bloody struggles which decimated the population and 
so relieved the labour-market, partly by distributions of plunder, 
and, above all, by assignations of lands. But the last Italian 
colony was sent out in b.c. 177 j ^nd a new generation had now 
grown up which had neither received nor expected any such 
relief. The lands of Italy were all occupied j no nation within 
its borders remained to be conquered ; and settlements beyond the 
seas possessed for the ordinary Roman citizen few attractions. 
As the wars came to be less constant and less sanguinary, the 



414 ROME. [book v. 

population increased rapidly, and no vent was provided for the 
new-comers. The labour-market was overcrowded ; it became 
difficult for a poor man to obtain a living j and those dangers 
arose which such a condition of things is sure to bring upon 
a State. 

The number of adult male Roman citizens, which was but 269,015 in B.C. 173, 
had increased to above 320,000 by B.C. 136, and in B.C. 125 stood at 390,736. 
In B.C. 114 it was 394,336, and in B.C. 86, after the admission of the Italians, 
it was 463,000. 

2. The state of affairs would have been very different, had 

the Licinian law with respect to the employment of free labour 

been enforced against the occupiers of the public 

of thrrich domain. This domain, which had now become 

and poor. extremely large (see above, p. 382), had_, naturally 

inent^of^free enough, been occupied by the capitalist (which was 

labour on the nearly identical with the governing) class, who 

State lands. ,,"',. , ^ r • 1 ., 

had at the time seemed to compensate fairly the 
non-capitalists by extremely liberal allotments of small plots of 
ground in absolute property. But, while the poorer classes in- 
creased in number, the richer were stationary, or even dwindled. 
Old ' houses ' became extinct, while new ' houses ' only with great 
difficulty pushed themselves into the ruling order. There were 
no means of obtaining much wealth at Rome except by the 
occupation of domain lands on a large scale, by the farming of 
the revenue, or by the government of the provinces. But these 
sources of wealth were, all of thern, at the disposal of the ruling 
class, who assigned them, almost without exception, to members 
of their own families. Thus the wealthy were continually becom- 
ing more wealthy, while the poor grew poorer. There was no 
appreciable introduction of new blood into the ranks of the 
aristocracy. The domain land was in b.c. 133 engrossed by the 
members of some forty or fifty Roman ' houses ' and by a certain 
number of rich Italians, of whom the former had grown to be 
enormously wealthy by inheritance, intermarriages, and the mono- 
poly of government employments. The ' modus agrorum ' estab- 
lished by Licinius had fallen into oblivion, or at least into disuse ; 
and several thousand ' jugera ' were probably often held by a single 
man. Still, in all this there would have been no very great hard- 
ship, had the domain land been cultivated by the free labour of 
Roman citizens,; either wholly or in any decent proportion. In 
that case, the noble ' possessor ' must have conveyed to his estate, 



PART I. PER. v.] LAWS OF THE ELDER GRACCHUS. 415 

in whatever part of Italy it was situated, a body of poor Roman 
freemen, who would have formed a sort of colony upon his land, 
and would have only differed from other colonists in working for 
wages instead of cultivating on their own account. The Roman 
labour-market would have been relieved, and no danger would 
have threatened the State from its lower orders. But it seemed 
to the 'possessor' more economical and more convenient to cul- 
tivate his land by means of slaves, which the numerous wars of 
the times, together with the regular slave-trade, had made cheap. 
The Licinian enactment was therefore very early set at nought; 
and it was not enforced. Everywhere over Italy the public 
domain was cultivated by gangs of slaves. 

3. Among the more wise and patriotic of the Romans it had 
long been seen that this state of things was fraught with peril. 
At Rome a proletariate daily becoming poorer and 
more unwieldy, content hitherto to be at the beck of danger 
and call of the nobles, but if it once grew to be to the State 

-" ° induces 

hungry and hopeless, then most dangerous — in Italy Ti. Sempronius 
a vast slave population, composed largely of those ^^^brine 
who had known liberty and were not deficient in forward 
intelligence, harshly treated and without any attach- 
ment to its masters, which might be expected on any favourable 
opportunity to rise and fight desperately for freedom — the govern- 
ment, if an outbreak occurred, dependent on the swords of the 
soldiers, who might largely sympathise with the poorer classes, 
from which they were in great measure taken — such a combina- 
tion boded ill for peace, and claimed the serious consideration of 
all who pretended to the name of statesmen. Unhappily, at Rome, 
statesmen were 'few and far between;' yet, about B.C. 140, 
Lselius (the friend of Scipio) had recognised the peril of the situ- 
ation and had proposed some fresh agrarian enactments as a 
remedy, but had been frightened from his purpose by the oppo- 
sition which the nobles threatened. Matters went on in the old 
groove till b.c. 133, when at length a tribune of the Plebs, Ti. 
Sempronius Gracchus by name, a member of one of the noblest 
Plebeian houses, came forward with a set of propositions, which 
had for their object the relief of the existing distress among the 
Roman citizens, and the improvement of the general condition of 
Italy by the substitution of free cultivators of the small yeoman 
class for the gangs of disaffected slaves who were now spread 



4i6 ROME. [BOOKV. 

over the country. The exact measures which he proposed were, 
(i) The revival of the obsolete law of Licinius, fixing the amount 
of domain land which a man might legally occupy at 500 jugera, 
with the modification that he might hold also 250 jugera for each 
of his unemancipated adult sons ; (2) The appointment of a stand- 
ing commission of three members to enforce the lawj (3) The 
division among the poorer citizens of the State-lands which would 
by the operation of the first provision become vacant; (4) The 
compensation of the possessores on account of their losses from 
improvements made on the lands which they relinquished by the 
assignment to them of the portions of land which they legally 
retained in absolute ownership ; and (5) The proviso that the new 
allotments, when once made, should be inalienable. 

There is no reason to believe that Gracchus was actuated by any but pure 
and patriotic motives. The servile war which was raging in Sicily (b.c. 134 
to 132) indicated a danger which might at any moment extend to Italy, and 
which did in fact show itself in places, as particularly at Minturnse and Sin- 
uessa. And some poor-law or other, some legal provision for the relief of the 
distress at Rome, was a State necessity. 

4. The propositions of Gracchus were intensely disagreeable to 
the bulk of the nobility and to a certain number of the richer 

Italians, who had, leffally or illegally, become occu- 

His laws . r \ , \ ^ ^ , . , 

opposed piers of the domain to an extent beyond that which 
^"^ P^qq*^' it was proposed to establish as the limit. Naturally 
therefore his laws were opposed. The opposition 
was led by one of his own colleagues, the tribune Octavius, who 
by his veto prevented the vote of the tribes from being taken. 
An unseemly contention followed, which Gracchus, unfortunately 
for himself and for his cause, terminated by proposing to the tribes, 
and carrying the deposition of his adversary. The laws were then 
passed, a commission was appointed (Gracchus, his brother Caius, 
and Ap. Claudius, his father-in-law), and the work of resumption 
and distribution commenced. 

5. But it was more easy to initiate than to carry out a measure 
of such extent and complication, and one that aroused such fierce 

passions, as that which the bold tribune had taken 
in hand. As he advanced in his work his popularity 
waned. His adversaries took heart ; and, to secure himself and 
his cause, he was forced to propose fresh laws of a more and more 
revolutionary character. The propositions which he made, and his 
conduct in endeavouring to secure his re-election, for the purpose 



PARTI. PER. v.] REFORMS OF THE GRACCHI. 417 

of carrying them, goaded his enemies to furyj and the Senate 
itself, with Scipio Nasica at its head, took the lead in a violent 
attack upon him as he presided in the Tribes^ and murdered him 
in open day together with 300 of his partisans. 

The proposals of Gracchus to give the Equestrian Order a distinct political 
status, by conferring on it the right to furnish one-half of the judices, hitherto 
taken only from the Senate, to grant an appeal to the people in civil causes, 
and to claim for the people the entire right of administering the newly-gained 
kingdom of Pergamus (besides determining the disposition of the treasure in 
their own favour), were measures of a far more revolutionary character than 
his Agrarian Law, which was less severe than that of Licinius. 

6. The open murder of a tribune of the Plebs engaged in the 
duties of his office was an unprecedented act in Roman History (for 
the assassination of Genucius, b.c. 471, had been _, 

-^ -r/ .» 'pjjg Agrarian 

secret), and sufnciently indicated the arrival of a Commission 
new period, when the old respect for law and order °^eTs"to^^ork"^ 
would no longer hold its ground^ and the State would but after 
become a prey to the violent and the unscrupulous, proceedings 
For the moment, however, the evil deed done recoiled ^^^ suspended, 

BO 129 

upon its authors. Nasica, denounced as a murderer 
on all hands, though unprosecuted, was forced to quit Italy and 
go into banishment. The Agrarian Commission of Gracchus 
was renewed, and allowed to continue its labours. Moderation 
on the part of the democratic leaders who had succeeded to the 
position of Gracchus would have secured important results for the 
poor from the martyrdom of their champion j but the arbitrary con- 
duct of the new commissioners, Carbo and Flaccus, disgusted the 
moderate party at Rome and large numbers of the Italians j the 
Senate found itself strong enough to quash the Commission and 
assign the execution of the Sempronian Law to the ordinary exe- 
cutive, the consuls ; and finally, when, by the assassination of the 
younger Africanus, the democrats had put themselves decidedly in 
the wrong, it wa§ able to go a step further, and suspend proceed- 
ings under the law altogether. 

7. A lull in the storm now occurred — a period of comparative 
tranquillity, during which only a few mutterings were heard, indi- 
cations to the wise that all was not over. A claim Tranquillity 
to the franchise began to be urged by the Latins and interrupted 
Italians, and to find advocates among the democratic of the 
Romans, who thought that in the accession of these itahans. 
fresh members to the tribes they saw a means of more eflPectually 

E e 



4i8 ROME. [BOOK V. 

controlling the Senate. Q^Fabius Flaccus, the consul of b.c. 125, 
formulated these claims into a lawj but the Senate contrived to 
tide over the difficulty by sending him upon foreign service. The 
Revolt of revolt of the disappointed Fregellse followed • and 
Fregellae. ^j-^g bioody Vengeance taken on the unhappy town 
frightened the Italians, for the time at any rate_, into silence. 
Meanwhile, the younger Gracchus, who had gone as quaestor into 
Sardinia, b.c. 126, was detained there by the Senate's orders till 
B.C. 124^ when he suddenly returned to Rome and announced him- 
self as a candidate for the Tribunate. 

Petty Wars of this Period. Revolt of Aristonicus in Asia, B.C. 131. 
Revolt put down, B.C. 129. War in Illyria, ibid. Guerilla War in Sardinia, 
B.C. 126 to 124. War with the Salluvii (Ligurians) for the protection of 
Massilia, B.C. 125 to 123. Balearic isles conquered by Metellus, B.C. 123. 

8. The measures of C. Gracchus were more varied and more 

sweeping than those of his elder brother j but they were cast 

Democratic in the same mould. He had the same two objects 

reforms of -^^ yiew — the relief of the ' poorer classes, and the 

the younger '- ' 

Gracchus. depression of the power of the Senate. Like his 
murdered brother, he fell a victim to his exertions in the 
B. c. 121. popular cause ; but he effected more. His elevation 
of the Equestrian Order, and his system of corn-largesses — the 
'Roman poor-law,' as it has been called — survived him^ and became 
permanent parts of the constitution. To him is also attributable 
the extension of the Roman colonial system into the provinces. 
He was a great and good man • but he had a difficult part to play ; 
and he was wanting in the tact and discretion which the circum- 
stances of the times required. The Senate, being far more than 
his match in finesse and manoeuvre, triumphed over him, though 
not without once more having recourse to violence, and staining 
the streets and prisons of Rome with the blood of above 3000 of 
her citizens. 

Measures of the younger Graeehus. 1. Renewal of his brother's 
Agrarian Law, with modifications, — viz. {a) A diminution in the size of the 
allotments ; Q}) The retention of the allottees in the position of possessores by 
the proviso that they should pay an annual quit-rent to the State ; (c) The 
requirement of good character as a condition in all claimants of allotments ; 
(^) An arrangement for settling the new allottees, or at any rate a portion of 
them, in colonies, at Capua, Tarentum, Carthage, and elsewhere. 2. Law 
requiring the State to sell corn at a loss to all Roman citizens who should 
apply for it, unsound in principle and injurious to the State in practice, but 
founded on the old precedent of similar sales in time of famine. 3. Law 
fixing the minimum of age for enlistment at 17, and requiring the State to 
furnish the soldiers' clothes. 4. Law transferring the duty of furnishing 
juries (^judices) from the Senate to the Knights {equites), and thereby elevating 



PAET I. PER. v.] ARISTOCRAT ICAL REACTION. 419 

the Knights into a distinct ' Order.' 5. Law requiring the Senate to deter- 
mine the Consular provinces beforehand, and to leave it to the Consuls them- 
selves to decide by lot or agreement which province each should administer. 
6. Law assigning the taxation of the new province of ' Asia ' to the Roman 
Censors. 7. Law assigning the management of the public roads in Italy to 
the Tribunes of the Plebs. And 8. Proposal, which did not become law, to 
extend the Roman franchise, at any rate to all the Latin colonies ; perhaps to all 
free Italians. This last proposition, which was at once just and really advanta- 
geous to the State, lost C. Gracchus his popularity with the existing voters ; and 
the Senate then, by encouraging the tribune, Livius Drusus, to outbid him in 
popular offers, which were never intended to be carried out, completed his 
ruin. When, in B.C. 121, he failed to obtain his re-election to the Tribunate, 
the aristocrats knew that they might safely sweep him from their path. 

The colony sent, at the instance of C. Gracchus, to Carthage in B.C. 122, 
was followed by another, which was founded at Aquse Sextiae (Aix in Provence) 
in the same year, and by a third, Narbo Marcius (Narbonne), founded four 
years later, b. c. 118, on the coast of Gaul where it approaches Spain. 

9. The death of C. Gracchus was followed within a short space 
by the practical repeal of his Agrarian law. First the proviso that 
the allotments made under it should be inalienable „. . 

His Agrarian 

was abrogated, so that the rich might recover them law is 
through mortgage or purchase. Then a law was passed ^^^^^ ^ 
forbidding any further allotments ('Lex Boria') and imposing 
a quit-rent on all ' possessores/ the whole amount of which was to 
be annually distributed among the poorer classes of the people. 
Finally^ by the ' Lex Thoria/ the quit-rents were abolished, and 
the domain land in the hands of the '• possessores ' was made over 
to them absolutely. 

The other laws of C. Gracchus, except those which were in their nature 
temporary, seem to have remained in force either permanently or for some 
considerable time. The ' Lex Frumentaria ' became the foundation of a 
regular system. That with respect to the ' judices ' lasted till the time of Sulla, 
who restored the right of furnishing them to the Senate, B. c. 80. 

The History of the Gracchi and their period has been a favourite subject 
for historical monographs. Besides the works on this point mentioned above, 
(p. 413) the reader may consult — 

Hegewisch, D. H., Geschichte der Gracchischen Unruhen. Altona, 1801. 

Heeren, a. H. L., Geschichte der burgerlichen Unruhen der Gracchen in his 
Vermischte historische Schriften, vol. iii. Gottingen, 1824. 

10. The twenty years from b.c. 130 to 100 formed a time of 
comparative internal tranquillity. Rome during this period was 
under the government of the aristocratical party, 

which directed her policy and filled up most of the high period. 
offices. But the party was during the whole period Progress of 

^ ^ " ^ corruption. 

losing ground. The corruption of the upper classes 
was gradually increasing, and — what was worse for their interests 
— was becoming more generally known. The circumstances of 
the Jugurthine War brought it prominently into notice. At the 

E e 2 



420 ROME. [book v. 

same time the democratic party was learning its strength. It 
found itself able by vigorous efforts to carry its candidates and 
its measures in the Tribes. It learnt to use the weapons which 
had proved so effectual in the hands of the nobles — violence and 
armed tumult — against them. And^ towards the close of the 
period, it obtained leaders as bold and ruthless as those who in 
the time of the Gracchi had secured the victory for the opposite 
faction. 

The severe exercise of the censorship (especially B.C. 115), the sumptuary 
laws, the trials and inquiries {quastiones) of this period, revealed rather than 
checked the growing corruption. Almost every man at Rome was found to 
have his price. Foreign princes bought their crowns of the Roman nobles, 
who in their turn bought their offices of the people. The judges, whether 
senators or knights, sold their decisions. Wealth continually flowed in from 
the gifts of the dependent monarchs and the plunder of the provincials. 
Enormous fortunes were made by almost every governor, quaestor, and farmer 
of the revenue. 

Ti. While internally Rome remained in tolerable tranquillity, 
externally she was engaged in several most important and even 

Wars of the dangerous wars. The year of the death of C. Grac- 
penod. chus, B.C. 1 21^ saw the conquest of Southern Gaul 
effected by the victories of Domitius and Fabius, and the formation 
of that new 'Province,' whereto the title has ever since adhered as 
a proper name (Provence). Three years later, b.c 118, the troubles 
began in Africa which led to the Jugurthine War. That war was 
chiefly important for the revelation which it made of Roman 
aristocratic corruption, and for the fact that it first brought pro- 
minently into notice the two great party-leaders, Marius and 
Sulla. Scarcely was it ended when a real danger threatened Rome 
from the barbarians of the North, a danger from which Marius, 
the best general of the time, with difficulty saved her. 

Details of the Jugurthine "War. Assassination of Hiempsal by Jugurtha, 

B.C. 118. Appeal of Adherbal to Rome, and partition of the kingdom between 

J ,, . him and Jugurtha, B.C. 117. Aggressions of Jugurtha on 

War^^^ Adherbal, B.C. 116 to 113. His siege of Cirta — Adherbal 

3 (,' taken prisoner and killed, B.C. 112. The tribune, C. Mem- 

111-106. mius, forces the Senate to declare war against Jugurtha ; and 

the consul, Calpurnius Bestia, is sent against him ; but he bribes 

Calpurnius to make peace, B.C. iii. Jugurtha is summoned to Rome, and 

obeys the summons. Memmius accuses, but another tribune, Baebius, protects 

him, and he is allowed to depart, notwithstanding that he has contrived at 

Rome the murder of his kinsman, Massiva, on whom the Romans were about 

to confer his crown. War resumed, B.C. no, by the consul Albinus, who, 

however, effects nothing. His brother, Aulus, succeeds to the command as 

pro-praetor, B.C. 109, and, being defeated, makes a peace, which the Senate 

refuses to confirm ; and the war is intrusted to Metellus, who takes Marius 

with him as his lieutenant. Metellus captures Cirta, B.C. 108, and most of 



PABTi. PEB. v.] JUGURTHINE AND CIMBRIC WARS. 421 

the other cities ; Jugurtha takes refuge at the court of the Mauretanian king, 
Bocchus. Marius, having gone to Rome, obtains the consulship, and is sent 
out, B.C. 107, to supersede Metellus. L. Cornelius Sulla is appointed his 
quaestor. Marius twice defeats Bocchus. Long negotiations follow, which 
Sulla conducts, and at last Bocchus consents to surrender Jugurtha, B.C. 106, 
who is led in triumph and then starved to death, B.C. 104. 

13. Before the war with Jugurtha was over, that with the northern 
barbarians had begun. The Cimbri and Teutones — Celts probably 
and Germans — issuing, as it would seem, from the cimbric 
tract beyond the Rhine and Danube, appeared sud- ravages, 
denly in vast numbers in the region between those streams and the 
Alps, ravaging it at their will, and from time to time threatening, 
and even crossing, the Roman frontier, and inflicting losses upon 
the Roman armies. The natives of the region especially subject 
to their ravages, in great part, joined them, especially the Ambro- 
nes, Tigurini, and Tectosages. As early as b.c. 113 a horde of 
Cimbri crossed the Alps and defeated the consul, Cn. Papirius 
Carbo, in Istria. In b.c. J09, Cimbri appeared on the borders of 
Roman Gaul (Provence) and demanded lands. Opposed by the 
consul, M. Junius Silanus, they attacked and defeated himj and 
from this time till b.c. ioi, the war raged almost continuously, 
Marius finally bringing it to a close by his victory near Vercellae 
in that year. 

Details of the Cimbric War. Defeat of Junius Silanus in Gaul, B.C. 109. 
Of L. Cassius Longinus, B.C. 107. Great defeat of Q^ Servilius Caepio and 
Cn. Mallius in the same region, B.C. 105. Marius made con- „. , . ,„ 
sul, B.C. 104. The Cimbri invade Spain, and engage the Ceiti- ^ ^ '^' 

berians, who after a while defeat them and compel them to 109-IOI 
re-cross the Pyrenees. Marius, meanwhile, with Sulla as his 
legate, organises his army. First appearance of the Teutones upon the scene, 
B.C. 103 — they join the Cimbri in Gaul, and arrange a combined attack on 
Italy, the Teutones undertaking to force their way through Provence and 
the Western passes, while the Cimbri entered Switzerland and sought the 
passes already known to them towards the East. Marius, who is re-elected 
consul year after year, remains in Provence to resist the Teutones, while his 
colleague of the year B.C. 102, C. Lutatius Catulus, awaits the Cimbri in North 
Italy. Great victory of Marius over the Teutones and Ambrones near Aquse 
Sextiee (Aix) — 150,000 slain and 90,000 made prisoners, B.C. 102. Invasion 
of Italy by the Cimbri, B.C. loi. Defeat of Lutatius on the Athesis (Adige). 
The Cimbri ascend the valley of the Po, expecting to form a junction with 
the Teutones. They are met near Vercellae by the combined armies of 
Marius and Lutatius, and suffer a complete defeat — 140,000 fall; 60,000 are 
made prisoners ; and the war is thus brought to a close. 

13. The victories of Aquae Sextise and Vercellse raised Marius 
to a dangerous eminence. Never, since the first establishment 
of the Republic, had a single citizen so far outshone all rivals. 
Had Marius possessed real statesmanship, he might have anti- 



42 2 ROME. [BOOK V. 

cipated the work of Julius, and have imposed himself on the State 
„. as its permanent head. But, though sufficiently 

at Rome ; ambitious, he wanted judgment and firmness. He 
sSuminus^ had no clear and definite views, either of the exact 
B.C. position to which he aspired, or of the means 

whereby he was to attain to it. His course was 
marked by hesitation and indecision. Endeavouring to please 
all parties, he pleased none. At first allying himself with Glaucia 
and Saturninus^ he gave his sanction to the long series of measures, 
by which the latter — the first thorough Roman demagogue — sought 
to secure the favour of the lower orders. He encouraged the per- 
secution of Metellus, and gladly saw him driven into exile, thus 
deeply offending the senatorial party. But when the violence and 
recklessness of his allies had provoked an armed resistance and 
civil disturbances began, he shrank from boldly casting in his lot 
with the innovators^ and, while attempting to screen, in fact sacri- 
ficed, his friends. 

Election of Marius to his sixth consulship, B.C. loi. Satiu-ninus seeks 
the tribunate, but is defeated by Nonius ; whereupon he has Nonius murdered 
and himself elected by a packed assembly in his place. He then, B.C. loo, 
brings forward the following measures: — (i) A law to assign extensive tracts 
of land in Cisalpine Gaul, and in Africa, to all those, whether Romans or 
Itahans, who had served under Marius ; the amount which individuals were 
to receive being as much, in some instances, as loo jugers. (2) A law to plant 
large colonies in Sicily, Achsa, and Macedonia. (3) A law to supply the 
settlers with money from the public treasury to enable them to stock their 
lands. Degradation of the Senate, which is required to swear to the first law. 
Refusal of Metellus leads to his exile. Fourth law of Saturninus — to reduce 
the price of the corn annually distributed to Roman citizens (see p. 418) from 
6^ ases the modius to f of an as. Riots excited by the nobles prevent the 
passing of this law. Fresh riots at the consular elections. C. Memmius 
beaten to death by the partisans of Glaucia and Saturninus. The Senate declare 
Glaucia and Saturninus public enemies, who thereupon seize the Capitol. 
Hesitation of Marius ; he at last consents to act against them. They sur- 
render, trusting to his protection. He endeavours to secure them a formal 
trial ; but the partisans of the Senate attack them in the Curia Hostilia, where 
Marius has confined them, and put them to death, 

J 4. The fall of Saturninus was followed, b.c. 99, by the recall of 

^. , Metellus from banishment, and the voluntary exile 
Time of 1 A /r • 

tranquillity, of the haughty and now generally unpopular Marius. 

99-91 That great general but poor statesman retired to 

Renewed Asia and visited the court of Mithridates. The 

Laws ^of triumph of his rival, though stained by the murder 

M. Livius of another tribune, seemed for a time to have given 

peace to Rome ; but the period of tranquillity was 

not of long duration. In b.c. 91, M. Livius Drusus, the son of 



PART I. PER. v.] SOCIAL WAR. 423 

the Drusus who had opposed C. Gracchus, brought forward a set of 
measures, which had for their object the reconcilement, at Rome, 
of the Senatorian with the Equestrian Order, and, in Italy, of the 
claims of the Italians with those of the old citizens of Rome. 
There had now been for thirty years a struggle at Rome between 
the nobles and the bourgeoisie on the question of which of the two 
should furnish the judices (see above, p. 417); expectations had been 
also for about the same space of time held out to the Italians gene- 
rally that they would be accepted into full citizenship. It was ven- 
turesome in Drusus to address himself at one and the same time 
to both these great questions. Successfully to grapple with them 
a man was required of first-rate powers, one who could bend op- 
posing classes to his will, and compel or induce them to accept, 
however reluctantly, the compromise which he considered just or 
expedient. Drusus seems to have possessed mere good intentions, 
combined with average ability. He carried his ' lex de judiciis,' but 
was unable to pass that extending the franchise. Once more the 
Roman conservatives had recourse to assassination, and delayed a 
necessary reform by a bold use of the knife. Drusus was murdered 
before his year of office was out; and the laws which he had 
passed were declared null and void by the government. 

The ' Lex Sempronia judiciaria/ which made the knights furnish the 
'judices,' B.C. 123 (see p. 418), was repealed, B.C. 106, by a law of Q^ Caepio 
Servilius, which restored their old right to the Senate. But this Servilian law 
was set aside by that of the tribune, C. Servilius Glaucia, B. c. 104, which 
recalled into force the Sempronian enactment. The compromise of Drusus 
placed the knights and the Senate on an equal footing. Three hundred 
knights, elected by the order, were to form the panel together with three 
hundred senators. The repeal of this law restored to the knights the exclu- 
sive possession of the much-coveted privilege. 

1 5. The murder of Drusus drove the Italians to despair. Accus- 
tomed for many years to form an important element in the Roman 
armies, and long buoyed up with hopes of obtaining . 

the advantages of citizenship — the chief of which were b. c. 

lands, cheap corn, and the covert bribery of largesses 90-88. 
— the tribes of Central and Southern Italy, finding their champion 
murdered and their hopes dashed to the ground, flew to arms. 
Eight nations, chiefly of the Sabine stock, entered into close 
alliance, chose Corfinium in the Pelignian Apennines for their 
capital, and formed a federal republic, to which they gave the 
name of 'Italia.' At the outset, great success attended the effort -, 
and it seemed as if Rome must have succumbed. Lucius Caesar, 



424 ROME. [book v. 

one of the consuls, Perperna, one of his legates, and Postumius, the 
praetor, were defeated. The allies overran Campania, destroyed 
a consular army under Csepio, and entered into negotiations with 
the northern Italians, whose fidelity now wavered. But the 
sagacious policy of Rome changed the face of affairs, and secured 
her a triumph which she could not have accomplished by arms 
alone. The '^Julian Law ' conferred full citizenship both on such 
of the Italians as had taken no part in the war hitherto, the Etrus- 
cans, Umbrians, Sabines proper, Hernicans, &c., and also on all 
such as upon the passage of the law ceased to take part in it. By 
this proviso the revolt became disorganised ; a ' peace party ' was 
formed in the ranks of the allies; nation after nation fell away 
from the league ; Rome gained successes in the field ; and at last, 
when only Samnium and Lucania remained in arms, the policy of 
concession was once more adroitly used, and the 'Lex Plotia,' 
which granted all that the allies had ever claimed, put an end to 
the war. > 

Details of the Social "War. Formation of the League between the 
eight nations — viz. the Marsi, Marrucini, Peligni, Vestini, Picentini, Samnites, 
Apuli, and Lucani, B. c. 90. Pompsedius and Papius made ' consuls.' Great 
successes of the allies. Revolt threatens to spread into North Italy. Passage 
of the ' Lex Julia.' Resistance of the allies slackens, B. c. 89. Sulla and the 
elder Pompey gain advantages. Campania recovered. Corfinium taken. 
Passage of the ' Lex Plotia.' Submission of the Pehgni and Vestini, B. c. 88 — 
then of the Marrucini and Marsi. Rebellion trampled out in Lucania and 
Samnium. 

16. The part taken by Marius in the Social War had redounded 

little to his credit. He had served as legate to the consul, Ruti- 

„ . . . lius, in the first disastrous year, and had declined 

Exaltation of ' -^ ' 

Sulla. battle when Pompaedius offered it. Probably his 
Marius °^ sympathies were with the revolters, and he had no 
His triumph, desire to push them to extremities. Sulla, on the 
other hand, had greatly increased his reputation by 
his campaigns of b.c. 89 and 88; and it was therefore natural 
that he should be selected by the Senate as the commander who 
was to undertake the war against Mithridates, which needed a 
first-rate general. But this selection deeply offended Marius, who 
had long regarded the conduct of that struggle as his due. Deter- 
mined to displace his rival, or perhaps actuated by a less selfish 
motive, he suddenly undertook the open championship of the 
Italians, whose forced admission to the franchise the government 
was attempting to make a mockery by confining them, despite 



PART I. PEE. v.] SULLA AND MARIUS. 425 

their large numbers, to some eight or ten tribes. At his instiga- 
tion, the tribune, Sulpicius, proposed, and, by means of tumult, 
carried a law distributing the new voters through all the tribes, 
and thus giving them the complete control of the Comitia. At 
the same time, he enrolled in the tribes a large number of freed- 
men. Comitia thus formed passed, as a matter of course, an 
enactment depriving Sulla of his post, and transferring the com- 
mand to Marius, b. c. 88. 

17. The insulted consul was not prepared to submit to his 

adversary. Quitting Rome, he made an appeal to his legions, 

and finding them ready to back his claims, he gyHa, takes 

marched straight upon the capital. The step seems "P ^^ms 
^ *■ 111 ^^^ enters 

to have been a complete surprise to Marius, who had Rome as a 

taken no precautions to meet it. In vain did the conqueror. 

Roman people seek to defend their city from the hostile entrance 

of Roman troops under a Roman general. A threat of applying 

the torch to their houses quelled them. In vain Marius, collecting 

such forces as he could find, withstood his rival in the streets and 

at first repulsed him. The hasty levies which alone he had been 

able to raise were no match for the legionaries. The victory 

remained with Sulla ^ and the defeated Marians were forced to 

seek safety in flight. Through a wonderful series of adventures, 

the late director of affairs at Rome, with his son, reached Africa 

an almost unattended fugitive. 

18. Meantime, at Rome, the consul, confident in his armed 
strength, proscribed his adversaries, repealed the Sulpician laws, 
put Sulpicius himself to death, and passed various He departs 
measures favourable to the nobility. But he could Reaction.^*^ 
not remain permanently at the capital. The affairs League of 
of the East called him away; and no sooner was he Marius, 
gone than the flames of civil war burst out afresh. '^•^- ^7. 
Cinnaj raised to the consulate by the popular party, endeavoured 
to restore the exiled Marius and to re-enact the laws of Sulpicius. 
But the aristocrats took arms. Cinna, forced to fly, threw himself, 
like Sulla, upon the legionaries^ and having obtained their support, 
and also that of the Italians generally, while at the same time he 
invited Marius over from Africa, marched on Rome with his parti- 
sans. Again the city was taken, and this time was treated like 
one conquered from an enemy. The friends of Sulla were but- 
chered J the houses of the rich plundered ; and the honour of noble 



426 ROME. [BOOK V. 

families put at the mercy of slaves. Prosecutions of those who 

had escaped the massacre followed. Sulla was proscribed, and 

a reign of terror was inaugurated which lasted for several months. 

But the death of Marius early in b.c. 86 put a stop to the worst of 

these horrors, though Rome remained for two years longer under a 

species of dictatorship, constitutional forms being suspended. 

Capture of Rome, B. c. 87. Marius and Cinna assume the consulship. Death 
of Marius, Jan. 13, B.C. 86. Cinna sole consul. Law of Valerius Flaccus 
reduces debts to one-third of their real amount. Cinna continues his consul- 
ship, and joins with himself Cn. Papirius Carbo, B.C. 85. Threatening atti- 
tude assumed by Sulla in the East. The consuls determine to proceed against 
him, but the soldiers decline to engage in civil war, and murder Cinna at 
Ancona. Carbo sole consul till B. c. 84, when Norbanus and L. Scipio are 
elected. Agrarian law proposed, and extension of the franchise to all who had 
served under Cinna or Marius. 

19. Meanwhile, in the East, Sulla had been victorious over 

Mithridates, had recovered Greece, Macedonia, and Asia Minor, 

crushed Fimbria, the Marian partisan, who sought 

datic War, to deprive him of his laurels, collected vast sums of 
88 ft4 money, and above all brought a large Roman army 
to feel that devotion to his person which is easily 
inspired in soldiers by a successful general. It is creditable to 
Sulla that he at no moment allowed his private quarrels to inter- 
fere with the public interests, but postponed the rectification of 
his own wrongs until he had taken ample vengeance for those of 
his country. The peace of Dardanus was in the highest degree 
honourable to Rome and humiliating to Mithridates, who not only 
abandoned all his conquests, but consented to a fine of 2,000 
talents and surrendered his fleet. Having accomplished in five 
campaigns, conducted mainly from his private resources, all the 
objects of the war_, Sulla could with propriety address himself to 
the settlement of his quarrel with the Marians, and having put 
down Fimbria in Asia^ could make his arrangements for fighting 
out the civil struggle, which had long been inevitable, in Italy and 
at Rome itself. 

Details of the First Mithridatic War. Mithridates overruns Asia 
Minor, and defeats the Roman general. Ma. Aquillius. General massacre of 
the Romans in Asia, B.C. 88. Revolt of Athens, into which Mithridates throws 
a strong garrison, B.C. 87. Sulla lands in Epirus, with 50,000 men. Siege 
of Athens and Piraeus. Athens taken, March i, B.C. 86. The Mithridatic 
generals, Archelaiis and Taxilas, defeated at Chseroneia. Archelails and Dory- 
laiis defeated near Orchomenus. The Marian Flaccus, sent to supersede 
Sulla, is murdered by his legate. Fimbria, who leads his army across the 
Hellespont and engages Mithridates in Asia, B.C. 85. Victory of Fimbria in 
Bithynia. Sulla detained in Europe by the resistance of Mithridates' allies in 



PAET I. PER. v.] FIRST CIVIL WAR. 427 

Thrace. Victory of Lucullus over the Mithridatic fleet off Tenedos, Mithri- 
dates sues for peace. Peace agreed upon in a personal interview between 
Sulla and Mithridates at Dardanus, B.C. 84. 

■2,0. The determination of Sulla to return to Italy at the head 
of his army^ and measure his strength against that of the Marians, 
had been apparent from the moment when he Return of 
declined to yield his command to Valerius Flaccus, Syll^, to Italy, 

B. c. 83' 

B.C. 86. The gage of battle had in fact been thrown and first 
down to him by his adversaries, when they declared ^'^^^^ ^^'■• 
him a public enemy, and he would have been more than human if 
he had not accepted it. He knew that the party of the nobles, 
whereof he was the representative, was still strong at Rome, and 
he felt that he could count on the army which he had now so often 
led to victory. The death of Marius had made him beyond 
dispute the first of living generals. There was none among the 
leaders of the opposite faction for whom he could feel much 
respect, unless it were the self-restrained and far from popular 
Sertorius. The strength of his adversaries lay in the Roman mob 
and in the Italians. For the former he had all a soldier's con- 
tempt j but the latter he knew to be formidable. He therefore, 
with adroit policy^ prefaced his return by a declaration, that he 
' intended no interference with the rights of any citizen, new or 
old.' The Italians accepted the pledge^ and stood neutral during 
the opening scenes of the contest. 

History of the First Civil War. Sulla landed in Italy with no more 
than about 40,000 men. He was joined, however, almost immediately by 
Metellus Pius, by Crassus, and by Pompey. Having defeated the consul 
Norbanus near Capua, and seduced into his service the army of Scipio, the 
other consul, he passed the winter of B.C. 83 in Central Italy, where he estab- 
lished the influence of his party. In B.C. 82 the Marians took the field with 
2Qo,ooo men under Carbo and the young Marius, the new consuls. Carbo 
fixed his quarters at Clusium, in Etruria, where the Marian cause was popular. 
Young Marius occupied the strong Latin city of Praeneste. Sulla attacked his 
more youthful antagonist fii-st. Having defeated him in the great battle of 
Angiportus, he shut him up in Prseneste, and passing through Rome, which 
was undefended, he attacked Carbo in his entrenchments, but failed to eff'ect 
anything. Meanwhile young Marius had made an appeal to the Lucanians 
and the Samnites, and had prevailed on them to espouse his cause. But 
the gallantry of C. Pontius Telesinus and his brave Italians was exerted in 
vain. The northern army was destroyed in detail by Carbo's unskilfulness, 
and the last hopes of the Marians were ruined by the battle of the Colline 
Gate, where Sulla and Crassus, after a desperate struggle, succeeded in defeat- 
ing the remnants of Carbo's army reinforced by the Italians under Telesinus. 
After the victory Sulla showed the stuff' of which he was made by massacreing 
in cold blood 6,000 Samnite prisoners. 

21. The triumph of Sulla and the nobles was stained by a 



428 ROME. [BOOK V. 

murderous cruelty such as Rome had never yet witnessed. Not 
Cruel severity o^V ^ere the leaders of the late war, and every 
of Sulla after relation of Marius that could be found, put to death, 
He^abdicates, but at Rome the wealthy bourgeoisie and in the pro- 
B.c. 79. vinces the disaffected Italians, were slaughtered by 
thousands. The fatal 'lists' of the 'proscribed' began; and num- 
bers of wholly innocent persons were executed merely on account 
of their wealth. Nearly 3,000 are said to have perished at Rome, 
13,000 at Prseneste, and numbers not much smaller at other 
Italian cities which had favoured the Marians. The property of 
every victim was confiscated. Sulla remained lord of Rome, first 
with no title, then as 'dictator,' for the space of nearly three 
years, when he astonished the world by a voluntary abdication of 
power, a retirement to Puteoli, and a dedication of the remainder 
of his life to amusement and sensual pleasures. First, however, 
by his dictatorial power he entirely reformed the Roman Consti- 
tution, depriving it of all elements of a popular character^ and 
concentrating all power in the hands of the Senate. 

Internal Changes effected by Sulla, (i) Degradation of the Tribu- 
nate by the extinction of all its powers except that of protecting the persons 
of citizens against the other magistrates. (2) Sole right of 
Sulla's new initiating legislation given to the Senate. (3) The judicla 

Constitution, placed once more in the hands of the Senate only. (4) Elec- 
tion to the high priestly offices of pontiffs and augurs abo- 
lished, and the principle of filling them up by ' co-optation ' re-established. 
(5) Restoration in a rigorous form of the ' lex annalis,' virhich required all 
candidates for high office to have passed through all the lower grades in 
a regular order, with fixed intervals of time between them. (6) Judicious 
measures against crimes — lex de sicariis\ de "veneficiis, &c. Besides these perma- 
nent enactments, Sulla, as dictator, undertook and effected a reconstruction of 
the Senate, the Tribes, and the Centuries, which he arranged as he thought 
best. The Senate he filled up to the number of 300 from his own creatures. 
The Tribes he 'purified ' by rejecting all, Italians or others, who had taken 
part with the Marians in the late war, and giving the franchise to 10,000 
emancipated slaves. Of the Centuries he made out his own list, on what prin- 
ciples we are not told. He then submitted all his laws to the body which he 
had thus constituted. Their acceptance was, it is plain, under the circum- 
stances, a matter of course. 

On the character and legislation of Sulla, the student may consult with 
advantage the work of 

Lau, Th., Cornelius Sulla, e'ine Biographie. Hamburg, 1855 ; 8vo. 

33. It was not to be expected that the violent changes intro- 
duced by Sulla into the Roman constitution could long remain 
Symptoms of unmodified. The popular party might be paralysed 
reaction. jjy terror for a time ; but it was sure to revive. The 
excesses of the nobles, now that their power was wholly unchecked, 
could not but provoke reaction. The very nobles themselves 



PART I. PER. v.] WAR WITH SERTORIUS. 429 

were scarcely likely to submit long to the restraints which the 
' lex annalis ' placed upon their ambition. Accord- ^^^ ^s of 
ingly, we find that immediately after Sulla's death, Lepidus and 
B.C. 78, an attempt was made by Lepidus, the con- 
sul^ to rescind his laws and restore the former constitution. This 
attempt, it is true, failed, as being premature- and so did the 
effort of the tribune, Cn. Sicinius, in B.C. "jS, to restore its powers 
to the tribunate. But, six years later, after the Sertorian and 
Gladiatorial Wars had been brought to an end and the strength of 
Mithridates broken, Sulla's constitution was wholly set aside, and 
the power of the nobles" received a check from which it never 
subsequently recovered. 

23. The individual who had the greatest share in bringing about 
the reversal of Sulla's reforms rose into notice under Sulla himself, 
but acquired the influence which enabled him to effect j^j^^ ^^ 
a great constitutional change in the wars which inter- Pompey to 
vened between the years b.c, 77 and 70. Cn. Pom- 
peius, whose father was a 'new man' [novus homd)^ and who was 
thus only just within the pale of the nobility, secured for himself 
a certain consideration by the zeal with which he worked for 
Sulla. Having crushed the Marians in Sicily and Africa, and lent 
effectual aid to the consul Catulus against Lepidus, he was 
rewarded in b.c. 77 by being sent as pro-consul to Spain, where 
Sertorius, recently one of the Marian leaders, had established an 
independent kingdom, and defied all the efforts of the aged Me- 
tellus to reduce him. Originally the object of Sertorius was to 
maintain himself in a position of antagonism to 

/ .11 1 War with _ 

Rome by the swords of the Spaniards; but when Sertorius, 
Perperna and the remnant of the Marian party fled 79I72 
to him, his views became enlarged, and he aspired 
to reinstate his partisans in authority at Rome itself. He would 
probably have succeeded in this aim, had not Perperna, thinking 
that he had found an opportunity of supplanting him in the affec- 
tions of the Spaniards, removed him by assassination. The war 
was after this soon brought to a close, Perperna having neither 
Sertorius' genius for command nor his power of awakening 
personal attachment. 

Details of the Sertorian War. Flight of Sertorius from Italy to Spain, 
B.C. 83, He is expelled from Spain by C. Annius and crosses to Africa. At 
the invitation of the Lusitanians, he returns, B.C. 81, and putting himself at 



430 ROME. [BOOK V. 

their head, establishes a small independent kingdom. Metellus is sent against 
him, B.C. 79, but fails to effect anything. By successive victories almost the 
whole peninsula is won from the Romans. A government is organised in 
which Spaniards and Romans share equally. Perperna joins Sertorius with 
the remnant of the army of Lepidus, B.C. 77. Pompey sent to Spain as pro- 
consul ; jealousy between him and Metellus. War continues with alternations 
of victory and defeat, B.C. 76 to 75. Sertorius negotiates with Mithridates, 
and aspires to impose his will on Rome. He becomes harsh to the Spaniards 
and addicts himself to the immoderate use of wine. Siege of Palencia, 
B.C. 74. Pompey retires with loss. Murder of Sertorius by Perperna, after 
the former had ordered the execution of the Spanish hostages, B.C. 72. Com- 
plete defeat of Perperna by Pompey, and end of the war within a few weeks 
of Sertorius' death. 

34. Before the Sertorian war was ended, that of the Gladiators 
had broken out. Spartacus, a Thracian chief, who had been made 

prisoner and then forced to become a gladiator, per- 

Gladiators, suaded those in the same condition as himself at 

„q" 71 Capua to rise against their tyrants. Joined by vast 

numbers of slaves and outlaws, he soon found him- 
self at the head of 100,000 men. Four generals sent against him 
were defeated signally, and during two entire years he ravaged 
Italy at his will, and even threatened Rome itself. But intestine 
division showed itself in his ranks j his lieutenants grew jealous 
of him j and in b.c. 71^ the war was committed to the praetor, 
Crassus, who in six months brought it to a termination. Spartacus 
fellj fighting bravely, near Brundusium. His followers generally 
dispersed; but a body of 5,000, which kept together, forced its 
way through Italy and had nearly reached the Alps, when Pompey 
on his return from Spain fell in with it and destroyed it utterly. 
About the same time, Crassus crucified all those whom he had 
« made prisoners, amounting to 6,000. 

35. The successful termination of these two important struggles 
exalted in the public esteem two men especially, the rich and 

shrewd Crassus, and the bland, attractive, and 
of Pompey thoroughly respectable Pompey. To them the State 
^"^ ^^70"^' h^^ i^ its dangers committed itself; and they now 

claimed, not unnaturally, to be rewarded for their 
services by the consulship. But the Sullsean constitution forbad 
their election; and to effect it the 'lex annalis" had to be broken 
through. The breach thus made was rapidly enlarged. Though 
hitherto Sullaeans,, Pompey and Crassus had now, it would seem, 
become convinced^ either that it was impossible to maintain a 
strictly oligarchical constitution^ or that such a constitution was 



PART I. PER. v.] LAWS OF POMPEY AND CRASSUS. 431 

not for their own personal interest. They had determined to 
throw themselves upon the support and sympathies of the Roman 
bourgeoisie J or upper middle class, and resting upon this basis to defy 
the oligarchy. The moving spirit in the matter was, no doubt 
Pompey, who easily persuaded his less clever colleague. Three 
measures were determined upon: — (i) The restora- xheir 
tion of the power of the tribunes, and the consequent legislation. 
resuscitation of the tribes ; (3) The transference of the judlcla to a 
body of which one-third only should be furnished by the Senate, 
the Knights furnishing one-third, and the remaining third being 
drawn from the Tribuni ^rarii ; (3) A purification of the govern- 
ment from its grossest scandals, partly by prosecutions, as that of 
Verres, partly by a revival of the office of Censor, which had been 
suspended by Sulla. Despite a fierce opposition on the part of the 
Senate, these measures were carried. The Senate was purged by 
the expulsion of sixty-four of its members. Verres was driven into 
exile. The control of the judlcla was transferred from the nobles 
to the upper middle class. The paralysis of political life, which 
Sulla's legislation had produced, was terminated by the restora- 
tion of a double initiative, and the consequent rivalry between two 
parties and two classes for the direction of the affairs of the State. 

The accession of Cicero to the party of Pompey was an event of consider- 
able importance. It is doubtful whether any other orator could so thoroughly 
and effectively have exposed the rottenness of the system upon which the pro- 
vinces were administered ; and without such an exposure the Senatorial party 
would scarcely have suffered defeat. 

36. A pause now occurred in the career of Pompey, who took 
no province at the close of his consulship, apparently contented 
with his achievements, or waiting till some great Reserve of 
occasion should recall him to the service of the Pompey. 
State. In this interval — b.c. 69 to 6^ — a new cha- ance of 
racter appeared upon the scene. C. Julius Csesar, J- Csesar. 
the nephew of Marius and son-in-law of Cinna, whom Sulla had 
spared in a moment of weariness or weakness^ acting probably in 
concert with Crassus and Pompey, exhibited at the funeral of Julia, 
his own aunt and the widow of Marius, the bust of that hero. At 
the same time, he pleaded the cause of his uncle, Cornelius Cinna, 
and obtained his recall, together with that of other Marian par- 
tisans. His wife, Cornelia, dying, he connected himself with 
Pompey by marriage. At this time the qusestorship, and soon after- 
wards the aedileship, were conferred upon him. The Pompeians 



432 ROME. [book v. 

regarded him with favour as a useful, but scarcely dangerous, 
adherent ^ the men of more advanced opinions already looked upon 
him as their leader, the chief who might and probably would give 
effect to their ideas. 

27. After two years of affected retirement, Pompey was once 

more, in b.c. 67, impatient for action. A danger had long been 

growing up in the eastern Mediterranean which by 

undertakes this time had become an evil of the first magnitude. 

the war -pj^g creeks and valleys of Western Cilicia and Pam- 
agamst the ■' 

Pirates. phylia (or Pisidia) had fallen into the hands of Pirates, 

granteTtT whose numerous fleets had continually increased in 
him, boldness, and who now ventured to plunder the 

coasts of Italy and intercept the corn-ships on which 
the food of Rome depended. Pompey undertook the war against 
this foe, and the opportunity was seized by his creatures to invest 
him with a species of command never before enjoyed, and dan- 
gerous as a precedent. He was given by the lex Gablnta authority 
over all the Mediterranean coasts, and over every city and terri- 
tory within 50 miles of the seaboard, B.C. 67. These extraordi- 
nary powers were used quite unexceptionally • Pompey applied 
them solely to the purposes of the war, which he began and ended 
in three months. 

First war with the Pirates in Isauria (part of Pisidia), B.C. 75. Conducted 
with some success by the proconsul, Q. Servilius — thence called Isauricus. 
Encouragement given to them by Mithridates. Appointment of M. Antonius 
to conduct the war, B.C. 75. He attacks Crete, which has fallen into their 
power, but fails, and dies there. Q. Metellus is sent againt Crete, B.C. 68, and 
reduces it to the form of a province. Gabinian law authorises the Senate to 
appoint a general with extraordinary powers, and is passed, notwithstanding 
the opposition of the nobles. Pompey appointed, B.C. 67. By the simul- 
taneous movements of a number of squadrons, he obtains a complete success. 

38. The precedent set by the Gabinian law was soon followed. 

In B.C. 66 the tribune, C. Manilius, moved, and Cicero urged, that 

the entire command of the whole East should be 

the war with intrusted to Pompey for an indefinite term, ^ until 

Mithridates, j^g h^jj brought the Mithridatic war to an end : ' and 
B.C. 65. ° . ' 

he once more set forth to employ his military talents 

for the advantage of his country. The Mithridatic war, conducted 
by Lucullus since e.g. 74, dragged on but slowly, partly in conse- 
quence of the aid given to Mithridates by Tigranes, partly owing 
to the economic measures of Lucullus himself, which alienated 
from him the affections of his soldiers. (See p. 397.) Pompey, by 



PABTi. PEE. v.] CONSPIRACY OF CATILINE. 433 

relaxing the strict rules of his predecessor, and by the politic 
device of an alliance with the Parthian king, Phraates, termi- 
nated the war gloriously in the space of two years, driving Mithri- 
dates into the regions beyond the Caucasus^ B.C. 6^. 

For the details of the Third Mithridatic War, see above, pp. 297, 298. So 
long as Mithridates lived, the war was not regarded as wholly over. It might 
at any time have been rekindled. But the suicide of the aged monarch, in 
B.C. 63, consequent upon the rebellion of his son, removed the last fear of 
a fresh outbreak, and left Pompey at liberty to settle the East at his pleasure. 

29. After driving Mithridates beyond the Caucasus, Pompey 
proceeded to overrun and conquer the rest of Asia within the 
Euphrates. He made himself master of the kingdom jjjg conquest 
of the Seleucidas without a blow, and reduced it into of Syria 
a Roman province. He proceeded through Coele- b.c.^ 

Syria to Judaea, besieged and took Jerusalem, and 64-63. 
entered the Holy of Holies. War with the Idumaean Arabs 
followed, but was interrupted by the death of Mithridates ; after 
which the Roman general, content with his gains, applied himself 
to the task of regulating and arranging the conquered territory — 
a task which occupied him for the rest of the year. He then 
returned home in a triumphal progress, B.C. 62, and arrived at 
Rome early in b.c. 61. 

Besides Syria, Bithynia and Pontus were made Roman provinces. Phar- 
naces, the son of Mithridates, was allowed to retain the Crimea. Ariobarzanes 
once more received Cappadocia. Deiotarus, prince of Galatia, had his domi- 
nions extended. Hyrcanus was established as king of Judaea. 

30. Meanwhile at Rome, the State had incurred the danger of 
subversion at the hands of a daring profligate. L. Sergius Cati- 
lina, a patrician of broken fortunes^ a man represent- 

, . 1 /- 1 • 1 I Conspiracy 

ing no party unless it were that of the ruined spend- of Catiline, 
thrifts and desperadoes with which Rome and Italy ^ ^■ 
now abounded, having failed in an attempt to better 
his condition, by means of the consulate, with its reversionary pro- 
vince, B.C. 64, combined with others in a similar position to him- 
self, and formed a plot to murder the consuls, seize Rome, and 
assume the government. Support was expected, not only from the 
class of needy adventurers, but from the discontented Italians, 
from the veterans of Sulla, eager for excitement and plunder, from 
the gladiatorial schools, from slaves and criminals, and from 
foreigners. The tacit acquiescence of the Marian party was 
counted on j and Csesar, and even Crassus, were said to have been 



434 ROME, [book v. 

privy to the conspirators' designs. But the promptitude and 
address of Cicero, consul at the time, frustrated the scheme j and, 
after a short civil war, the danger was removed by the defeat 
of the rebels in Etruria^ B.C. 62, and the death of the arch- 
conspirator. 

First conspiracy of Catiline, B.C. 65, fails through the death of Piso, who 
was to have supported it with his Spanish levies. Second conspiracy, B.C. 63. 
Catiline, denounced by Cicero, quits Rome. Execution of Lentulus and 
Cethegus. Catiline defeated by the pro-consul, Antonius, B.C. 62. Falls in 
the battle. 

31. In the absence of Pompey, the guidance of affairs at Rome 

had been assumed chiefly by three men. These were Cato, Cicero, 

^ and Csesar. Crassus, who is sometimes mentioned 

Influence ot ' 

Cato, Cicero, with them as a leader, was in reality too indolent 
^ GrowlnJ'^ and too weak in character to be of any real account, 
power of and could only influence affairs by means of his 
enormous wealth. Cato, a descendant of the old 
Censor, and a man of similar character^ was at the head of the 
senatorial party; Csesar was the acknowledged chief of the Ma- 
rians ; while Cicero held an intermediate position, depending for 
his power almost wholly on his unrivalled eloquence, and having 
the confidence of neither of the two great factions. Of the three, 
the one whose genius was the greatest^ and whose influence mani- 
festly tended to preponderate, was Caesar. Though bankrupt in 
fortune, such was the adroitness of his conduct, and such the 
inherent strength of the principles with which he was identified, 
that at every turn of affairs he rose higher, and tended to become 
more and more manifestly the first man in the Republic. Entitled 
to assist in the administration of justice after his aedileship, he 
boldly condemned to death agents in the Syllaean assassinations ; 
he defeated the chief of the Senate, Catulus, in a contest for the 
office of Pontifex Maximus; accused of complicity in the con- 
spiracy of Catiline, he forced Cicero to admit that on the contrary 
he had given the information which led to its detection ; elected 
Praetor in b.c. 62, he bearded the Senate by the protection of 
Masintha, baffled their attempt to entangle him in a quarrel with 
the profligate Clodius, and finally, having obtained a loan of 830 
talents (200,000/.) from Crassus, he assumed in b.c. 61 the govern- 
ment of the Further Spain, where he completed the conquest of 
Lusitania, and made himself the favourite of an important army. 
His star was clearly in the ascendant when Pompey, after an 



PAET I. PER. v.] FIRST TRIUMVIRATE. 435 

unwise delay in the East, at length returned to Rome soon after 
Caesar had quitted it. 

32. During his absence Pompey had become more and more an 
object of suspicion to the Senate ; and his own proceedings, as the 
time of his return approached, were little calculated Return of 

to inspire confidence. His creature, Metellus Nepos, Pompey 
who arrived in Rome B.C. 62, was in constant com- ^ ^ qi * 
munication with the Marian chief, Caesar, and pro- F'^^sr 

1- ■\^ r -r\ -i TRIUMVIRATE 

posed early in that year the recall of rompey, with or league of 
his army, to Italy, and the assignment to him of all Pompey, 
the powers of the State, for the purpose of concluding Crassus, 
the Catilinarian war. The boldness of Cato bafHed ^'^' 
this insidious attempt j and, when the pro-consul returned in 
B.C. 61^ it was with a studious appearance of moderation and 
respect for the law. He disbanded his troops as soon as he 
touched the soil of Italy, came to Rome accompanied by only 
a few friends, obtained the consent of the Senate to his triumph, 
claimed no extraordinary honours, and merely demanded allotments 
for his soldiers and the ratification of his Asiatic *acts,' which 
were all certainly within the terms of his commission. But the 
Senate had passed from undue alarm to undue contempt, and 
were pleased to thwart one whom they disliked and had so lately 
feared. Pompey's requests were refused — his 'acts' were uncon- 
firmed — and his veterans denied their promised allotments. Here- 
upon, Pompey accepted the overtures made to him by Caesar, who 
effected the private league or cabal, known afterwards as the 
'First Triumvirate,' between himself, Pompey, and Crassus, the 
basis of which was understood to be antagonism to the Senatorial 
party, and the maintenance against all rivals of the Triumvirs' 
power and influence. 

33. The formation of the Triumvirate was immediately followed 
by the election of Csesar to the Consulate, and the passing, by 
means of tumult and violence, of a number of laws 

' Consulship 

for the advantage of the people. The first of these of Cjesar, 
was an Agrarian Bill on an extensive scale, which ^'°' ^^' 
provided for the veterans of Pompey, and at the same time gave 
estates in Campania to a large portion of the Roman populace. 
A second forced the Senate to swear to the Bill under penalty of 
death. A third relaxed the terms on which the knights were 
farming the revenues of Asia. At the close of a Consulate which 

F f 2 



436 ROME. [book V. 

was almost a Dictatorship, Csesar obtained for himself the govern- 
ment of the two Gauls and of Illyricum for a space of five years, 
thus securing himself a wide field for the exercise of his military 
talents, and obtaining the opportunity of forming a powerful army 
devoted wholly to his interests. 

The bonds between the two chief Triumvirs were drawn tighter by the 
marriage of Pompey to Julia, the daughter of Csesar. Caesar at the same time 
married Galpurnia, the daughter of L. Calpurnius Piso. 

34. The Triumvirs could not count on the firm establishment of 
their power, so long as the two party-leaders, Cicero and Cato, 
_ ., maintained unimpaired their high and dignified posi- 

of Cicero, tion. Accordingly, they set themselves through their 
^' ^' ' creatures at once to remove from the seat of govern- 
ment these two statesmen, and to cast a permanent slur upon 
their characters. The tribune Clodius drove Cicero into banish- 
ment on the charge of his having acted illegally in putting to death 
Lentulus and Cethegus. The great orator's property was confis- 
cated, and his houses were demolished. As against Cato no plau- 
sible charge could be made, his removal was effected by thrusting 

Cato sent to Upon him an unwelcome commission which was likely 
Cyprus. ^Q bring odium on those engaged in it. He was sent 
to deprive Ptolemy of his kingdom of Cyprus on pretexts utterly 
frivolous, and to convert that island into a Roman province. 
Though Cato conducted himself with skill and with unimpeachable 
integrity in this delicate transaction, yet the decline of his influ- 
ence may be dated from his acceptance of an office unsuited to his 
character. 

•3^^. On Cicero the blow dealt by the Triumvirs fell even more 
heavily. Though recalled from banishment within eighteen months 
of his quitting Italy, he never recovered his former position either 
in the opinion of others or in his own. Constitutionally timid, his 
exile effectually cowed him. He lost all confidence in the grati- 
tude of his countrymen, in the affection of his friends, in his 
own firmness and prudence. Henceforth he no longer aspired 
to direct the counsels of the State: his efforts were limited to 
moderating the violence of parties and securing his own personal 
safety by paying court to those in power. Towards the close of 
his career, indeed, he ventured once more to take a bolder atti- 
tude, but it was when the star of Antony was beginning to pale 
before the rise of a brighter luminary. 



PART I. PEB. v.] MEASURES OF CLODIUS. 437 

In the Letters and Orations of Cicero we have by far the most important con- 
tributions to the history of the period between Sulla and Augustus, which the 
ravages of time have spared to us. The best works on the life and character 
of the great orator are — 

Middleton's Life of Cicero. London, 1823; 2 vols. 8vo. Not superseded 
by any later publication. 

WiELAND, Sammthche Briefe des Cicero. Zurich, 1808 et seqq. ; 7 vols. 8vo. 

Merivale, Rev. C, Life and Letters of Cicero. London, 1854 ; 8vo. 

'3^6. The tribune, Clodius, who had moved and carried the 
measures by which Cicero and Cato were forced to quit Rome, 
was not content to be a mere tool in the hands of 
the Triumvirs. His measures for the gratuitous cicero, 
distribution of corn, for the limitation of the censors' ^- ^- ^^ > 

^ and 

powers over the Senate, and for the re-establishment prosecution 
of the guilds, were probably concerted with Pompey; ° ° 
but it was not long before he exhibited an independent spirit, out- 
raged his protector, and stood forward as a separate party leader 
of the more violent kind. Pompey was thus forced to incline 
for a while towards the Senatorians, to encourage the recall of 
Cicero, and to allow the prosecution of Clodius. It was the hope 
of the Triumvir that affairs would fall into such a condition as 
manifestly to require a Dictator, and that he would be selected for 
the office. But the Senate's vigour was not yet exhausted j it was 
content to reward Pompey by a new commissionership {the pr^fec- 
tura annonce):^ to oppose its own 'bravo,' Milo, to Clodius j and 
to foment discord between Pompey and Crassus, who naturally 
tended to become more and more jealous of each other. 

37. Civil war would probably at this time have broken out^ had 
it not been for the management of Csesar. At interviews which 
he held with Crassus and Pompey at Ravenna and Yxt%\\ 
Lucca, he succeeded in bringing them to an agree- understanding 
ment, and in arranging plans for the further aggran- the Triumvirs, 
disement both of himself and them. He urged ^•'^- ^^• 
them to seek the Consulate for the ensuing year, and to obtain for 
themselves such governments as suited them at its close. For 
himself he required the prolongation of his proconsulship for a 
second term of five years. Within this period he could hope to 
have gained such successes as would dazzle the eyes of the 
Romans at home, and to have acquired unbounded influence over 
the veteran army, which would have then served ten years under 
his banner. 

38. The Second Consulate of Pompey and Crassus, B.C. ^^^ 



438 ROME. [BOOK v. 

brought about by violence and tumult, was a further step towards 

Second ^^^ demoralisation of the State, but produced a tem- 

Consulate of porary lull in the strife of parties. The Triumvirs 

°(^assus" severally obtained their immediate objects. Despite 

B.C. 55, the efforts of Cato, Caesar was assigned the Gauls 

Crs-Ssus KillGQ 

by the for an additional term of five years. Pompey re- 
Parthians. ceived the Spains for an equal period, while the rich 
East was made over to the avaricious Crassus, who became pro- 
consul of Syria and commander-in-chief of the Roman forces in 
the oriental provinces. Pompey, moreover, managed to establish 
the new principle of combining the administration of a province 
with residence in the capital. Under the pretext that his office 
of ' prsefectus annonae ' required his presence at Rome, he admi- 
nistered Spain by his legates, and, in the absence of Crassus, 
acquired the sole direction of affairs at the seat of Empire. This 
position was still further secured to him by the death of Crassus 
in his rash expedition against the Parthians, b.c. ^'3^. 

Departure of Crassus for the East, B.C. 55. He invades Mesopotamia, 
B.C. 54, and takes some unimportant towns, but returns into Syria for the 
winter. Second invasion, B.C. 53. Crassus completely defeated in the 
country between the Belik and the Khabour, and soon afterv/ards treacherously 
seized by the Parthian general at a conference, and, in the tumult which 
ensued, slain. 

39. The death of Crassus, by reducing the Triumvirate to a 

Duumvirate, precipitated the struggle which had been long im- 

. , . . pending. The tie of relationship which united 

of Pompey. Pompey and Csesar had been dissolved by the death 

Csesa^to^a of Julia, B.C. 54. Another check on'Pompey's ambi- 

rupture, tion was removed by the murder of Clodius in an 

B c 50 

affray with Milo, b.c. ^'3^. After this Pompey appa- 
rently thought that the time was at length come when, if Csesar 
could be disgraced, the State must fall wholly into his hands. He 
therefore encouraged the proposals that were made by the extreme 
aristocrats, to deprive Csesar prematurely of his proconsular office, 
or at any rate to prevent him from suing for the consulship until 
he had ceased to be the lord of legions. After himself holding 
the office of sole consul for the space of six months, b.c. 53, and 
obtaining the prolongation of his own proconsulship for a further 
term of five years, he sought to reduce his partner and rival to the 
mere rank of an ordinary citizen. It was not to be supposed that 
Caesar would consent to this change, a change which would have 



PART I. PER. v.] SECOND CIVIL WAR. 439 

placed his very life at his enemies' mercy. War was certain from 
the moment when, in spite of the veto of two tribunes, the Senate, 
at Pompey's instigation, appointed Caesar's successor and required 
him, before standing for the consulate, to resign his proconsular 
command. Cassar would have lost all at which he had aimed for 
ten years, had he yielded obedience to this mandate. To expect 
him to do so was to look for antique self-denial and patriotism in 
an age when these virtues had been long out of date, and in an 
individual who had never shown any signs of them. 

Campaigns of Csesar between B.C. 58 and B.C. 50. Great migration of 
the Helvetii from Switzerland to Central Gaul, B.C. 58. They are pursued by 
Caesar, defeated in two battles, and forced to return. Campaign against the Ger- 
man chief, Ariovistus; the Suevi are driven across the Rhine. Conquest of Gallia 
Belgica, and submission of Northern Aquitania, B.C. 57. Galba, sent to occupy 
the Rhone valley above the Lake of Geneva, is defeated and forced to retire. 
Great revolt of the Veneti and other tribes in Aquitania, B.C. 56. The Veneti 
receive help from Britain, but are shortly reduced to subjection. Southern 
Aquitania reduced by P. Crassus. Fresh invasion of Gaul by German tribes, 
B.C. 55. Caesar defeats them, drives them across the Rhine, and carries the 
war into Germany proper by a raid across the Rhine. Later in the same 
year he invades Britain, and receives the submission of some chiefs, but loses 
most of his fleet by a storm. Second invasion of Britain, B.C. 54. Defeat of 
Cassevelaun, and nominal subjection of his kingdom to a small trilDute. Revolt 
breaks out in Gaul, but is suppressed. Destruction of the Eburones, B.C. 53. 
Gaul continues unsettled. Great rebelUon under Vercingetorix, B.C. 52. 
Caesar defeated at Gergovia. Danger of his position. Vercingetorix rashly 
offers battle, is defeated, blockaded in his fortified camp, and forced to sur- 
render. Last remnants of the rebellion trampled out, B.C. 51. 

40. On hearing of the Senatorial decrees, the resolve of Caesar 

was soon taken. He would appeal to the arbitrament of arms. 

At the head of a veteran army devoted to his person, 

, J Second 

With all the resources of Gaul to draw upon, and civil War, 

endeared to the Italians generally as the successor 49I45 

of Marius, he felt himself more than a match for Flight of 

Pompey and the Senate, and was ready to engage any ompey. 

force that they could bring against him. Accordingly he ' crossed 

the Rubicon,' and began his march upon Rome. Pompey had 

probably expected this movement, and had determined upon the 

line of conduct which he would pursue. He would not attempt 

to defend Italy, but would retire upon the East. In that scene 

of his old glories he would draw together a power sufficient, not 

only to secure him against his rival, but to re-enter and re-conquer 

Italy. He would drag the Senate with him, and having carried it 

beyond the seas, would be its master instead of its slave. Having 

the command of the sea, he would coop up his rival in Italy, 



440 ROME, [book v. 

until the time came when his land forces were ready to swoop 
down upon their prey. With these views he retired as Csesar 
advanced, making only a show of resistance, and finally crossed 
from Brundisium to Epirus without fighting a battle. 

41. By the retirement of Pompey, all Italy was thrown into 
Csesar's arms. He acquired the immense moral advantage of 
Csesar master holding the seat of government, and of being thus 
of Italy. 2h\t to impart to all his acts the colour of legitimacy. 
He secured also important material gains ; first, in the acquisition 
of the State-treasure, which Pompey most unaccountably neglected 
to carry ofFj and, further, in the power which he obtained of draw- 
ing recruits from the Italian nations, who still furnished their best 
soldiers to the Roman armies. The submission of Italy drew with 
it almost of necessity that of Sardinia and Sicily; and thus the 
power of the proconsul was at once established over the entire 
middle region of the Empire, reaching from the German Ocean to 
the Sea of Africa, and from the Pyrenees to Mount Scardus. 
Pompey possessed the East, Africa, and Spain ; and, had his 
counsels been' inspired with energy and decision, he might 
perhaps have advanced from three sides on his rival, and have 
crushed him between the masses of three converging armies. 
But the conqueror of Mithridates was now old, and had lost 
the vigour and promptitude of his early years. He allowed 
Csesar, acting from a central position, to strike separately at the 

different points of his extended line. First, Spain 
He takes the 
offensive was attacked, and, for the time, reduced to subjec- 

everjrwhere \\q^. then, the war was transferred to the East, 

and IS ' ' _ ' 

everywhere and its issue (practically) decided at Pharsalia; after 
VIC onous. ^j^^^^ ^^ Pompeians were crushed in Africa ; and 
finally, the party having rallied in Spain^ was overwhelmed and 
blotted out at Munda. These four wars occupied the great 
soldier during the chief portion of five years (b.c. 49 to 45) ; in 
the course of which, however, he found time also to reduce Egypt, 
and to chastise Pharnaces, son of Mithridates, at Zela. 

Details of Caesar's Wars between B.C. 49 and B.C. 45. {a) FirstWar 
in Spain. March of Csesar through Gaul to the Pyrenees, B.C. 49. Siege of 
Massiha, which declares for Pompey. Csesar encounters the Pompeian forces 
under Afranius and Petreius at Ilerda (Lerida). After suffering one defeat, 
he outmanoeuvres his opponents, and forces them to surrender themselves. 
Terentius Varro in Southern Spain, after vacillating between the two causes, 
declares against Csesar, but is deserted by his soldiers and capitulates. 
Soon afterwards Massilia is taken. Defeat of Caesar's lieutenant, Curio, in 



PAET I. PEB. v.] SUCCESS OF CyESAR. 441 

Africa, and destruction of his army by the Pompeians and Juba. (^) "War in 
the Hellenic Peninsula. Caesar, through the negligence of the Pompeian 
admirals, crosses the Adriatic unopposed, January, B.C. 48. Pompey meets 
him at Dyrrhachium, but declines a battle, entrenching himself, so as to cover 
the town. Cgesar blockades his position, but Pompey, after watching patiently 
for his opportunity, breaks up the blockade and gains a victory over the 
Csesarean army. This success ruined his cause. It rendered his officers 
unmanageable, and forced him to give the Csesareans battle at Pharsalia, in an 
open plain, where the superiority of Caesar's troops, and the better generalship 
of their commander, led to the complete defeat of the grand army on which 
rested all Pompey's hopes of final triumph. Had he possessed more resolution, 
he might no doubt have prolonged the contest, as his party did, even after his 
death ; but, however he had acted, it is scarcely possible that he could have 
retrieved his signal defeat. His choice of Egypt as a refuge was, as the event 
proved, ill-judged ; but the treachery to which he fell a victim could scarcely 
have been anticipated, and we can understand, even if we cannot justify, his re- 
luctance to quit the East, (c) War in Egypt. The necessity of following up his 
adversary, and striking, if it were necessary, a last blow, drew Ctesar to Egypt, 
where he found himself in a most critical position. He landed with a force 
not exceeding 4,000 men, and, being ensnared by the charms of Cleopatra, 
was soon regarded with jealousy by the young king, her brother and rival, 
while the hatred with which the Egyptians generally viewed foreign inter- 
ference with their concerns was easily roused against him by the king's 
ministers. Quarrels and street fights between his soldiers and the Alexan- 
drians gave him a pretext for assuming a hostile attitude. Accordingly he 
seized and fortified the Pharos, burnt the Egyptian fleet, and sent hastily for 
reinforcements. The Egyptians on their side blockaded him in the Pharos, 
cut off his supplies of water, and endeavoured to starve him into submission. 
But the advance of Mithridates of Pergamus (b.c. 47) relieved the Roman 
general ; and the Egyptian army, placed between two fires, was speedily 
defeated and destroyed. The young king perished ; and Caesar was able to 
arrange matters to the satisfaction of all parties by investing Cleopatra, under 
certain conditions (see p. 251), with the actual sole government, (^d) War 
with. Pharnaees. The dissensions of the Romans among themselves encouraged 
the son of Mithridates to attempt the recovery of his father's empire. Imme- 
diately after the battle of Pharsalia, he advanced into Lesser Armenia and 
Cappadocia. Opposed by Calvinus, one of Caesar's lieutenants, he defeated 
him in a pitched battle and destroyed his army. He then occupied Pontus. 
Cassar, who was at this time blockaded in Egypt, could do nothing ; but no 
sooner was he released, than he marched with all speed to encounter this new 
enemy. The hosts met at Zela in Pontus, and Caesar was as usual victorious. 
The laconic bulletin, ' Veni, vidi, vici,' expressed the rapidity of his conquest. 
Pharnaees escaped from the battle, but was soon afterwards killed, and his 
kingdom served to reward Mithridates of Pergamus. (^ ) War in Africa. The 
Pompeians who escaped from Pharsalia established themselves in the Roman 
province of Africa, where they had the support of Juba, the king of Numidia. 
They were commanded by Scipio, the father of Pompey's widow, Cato, and 
Varus, proconsul of the province. Much jealousy existed among the com- 
manders. Caesar landed in Africa in December, B.C. 47. In his first engage- 
ment near Leptis he was worsted; but early, in B.C. 46, he redeemed this 
mischance by the great victory of Thapsus, which destroyed the republican 
force in this quarter. Scipio, Cato, and Juba killed themselves ; and Africa 
submitted to the conqueror. (/) Second War in Spain. Revolt first broke 
out in Spain among the Caesarean legionaries, who were seduced by the 
republican spirit which prevailed among the Romanised natives. The revolt- 
ers received important accessions to their ranks after the battle of Thapsus, 
being reinforced by the remnants of the African army. Varus, Labienus, and 
the two sons of Pompey, Cnaeus and Sextus, joined them ; and Cn. Pompeius 



442 ROME. [book v. 

was entrusted with the chief command. A vigorous stand was made against 
the troops which Caesar led in person across the Pyrenees ; and in the final 
battle, which took place at Munda (March, B.C. 45), the Dictator was in greater 
personal danger than ever before. But the victory when gained was complete. 
Thirty thousand Pompeians were left on the field ; among them Labienus 
and Varus. Cn. Pompeius fled, but was overtaken and slain. Sextus alone 
escaped, and found a refuge with some of the hill tribes, who defied the 
Roman arms. The settlement of Spain after the battle of Munda was a work 
of difficulty, and occupied the Dictator for nearly six months. 

43. The claim of Caesar to be considered one of the world's 
greatest men rests less upon his military exploits, important as 
Cssars civil these undoubtedly were, than upon his views and 
admimstration. eflforts as a Statesman and social reformer. It was 
his great merit that he understood how the time for the Republic 
had gone by; how nothing but constant anarchy at home and 
constant oppression abroad could result from the continuance of 
that governmental form under which Rome had flourished so 
wonderfully in simpler and ruder ages. He saw distinctly that 
the hour had arrived for monarchy ; that, for the interests of all 
classes, of the provincials, of the Italians, of the Romans, of the 
very nobles themselves, a permanent supreme ruler was required j 
and the only man fit at the time to exercise that office of supreme 
ruler he knew to be himself. He knew too, though perhaps he 
failed to estimate aright, the Roman attachment to old forms, and 
he therefore assumed, in B.C. 47, the perpetual ^dictatorship,' 
whereby he reconciled the actual establishment of an absolute 
monarchy with the constitutional purism which had weight with 
so many of his contemporaries. Having thus secured the substance 
of power, he proceeded, even in the midst of his constant wars, to 
bring forward a series of measures, which were, in most cases, at 
once moderate, judicious, and popular. He enlarged the Senate 
to the number of 900, and filled up its ranks from the provincials 
no less than from the class of Roman citizens. He once more con- 
fined the judkia to the senators and equites. He raised to the 
rank of citizens the entire population of Transpadane Gaul, and 
numerous communities in Gaul beyond the Alps, in Spain, and else- 
where. He enfranchised all professors of the liberal sciences. He 
put down the political clubs. He gave his veterans lands chiefly 
beyond the seas, planting them, among other places, at Corinth 
and Carthage, cities which he did not fear to rebuild. He arranged 
matters between the two classes of debtors and creditors on a 
principle which left financial honesty untouched. He re-enacted 



PART I. PEB. v.] C^SAR MURDERED. 443 

the old Licinian law, which required the employment of free labour 
on estates in Italy in a certain fixed proportion to the number of 
slaves. He encouraged an increase in the free population by 
granting exemptions to those who had as many as three children. 
He proposed the codification of the laws, commenced a survey of 
the Empire, and reformed the calendar. When it is remembered 
that Csesar only held power for the space of about five years, and 
that the greater portion of this period was occupied by a series of 
most important wars, such legislative prolific ness, such well- 
planned, varied, and (in some cases) most comprehensive schemes, 
cannot but provoke our admiration. 

43. But the Dictator, though endued with political insight far 
beyond any of his contemporaries, was after all only a fallible 
mortal. He may neither have been wholly corrupted j^.^ ^^^^j^ 
by his passion for Cleopatra, nor so much intoxi- March 15, 
cated by the possession of supreme power as to have 
wantonly disregarded the prejudices which stood in the way of his 
ambition. But at any rate he misjudged the temper of the people 
among whom his lot was cast, when^ because his own logical mind 
saw that monarchy was inevitable, he encouraged its open procla- 
mation, without making sufficient allowance for the attachment of 
large classes of the nation to phrases. He thus provoked the 
conspiracy to which he fell a victim, and cannot be exonerated 
from the charge of having contributed to his own downfall. The 
conspiracy against the life of J. Csesar, formed by Brutus and 
Cassius, found so many abettors^ not from the mere blind envy 
of the nobles towards a superior, but because there was engrained 
into the Roman mind a detestation of Royalty. The event proved 
that this prejudice might be overcome^ in course of time, by adroit 
management j but Caesar boldly and without disguise affronted 
the feeling, not aware, as it would seem, of the danger he was 
incurring. His death, March 15, B.C. 54, introduced another 
period of bloody struggle and civil war, which lasted until the 
great victory gained by Octavius at Actium, B.C. 31. 

The biography of Julius Csesar has been a favourite subject with historians ; 
but it can scarcely be said that any ' Life ' yet published is thoroughly satis- 
factory. Among those which demand notice are the following : — 

Celsus, Jul., De Fita et Rebus gestis J. Cecsaris. London, 1697 ; 8vo. 
De Bury, Histoire de la Vie de Jules Cesar. Paris, 1758 ; 2 vols. 8vo. 
Meissner, a. G., Leben Ccesar's, continued by Haken, J. C. L. Berlin, 
181 1 ; in four parts. 



444 ROME. [book v» 

Napoleon, Louis, Histoire de Jules Cesar. Paris, ist vol. published in 1865; 
2nd vol. in 1866. The second voliame ends with the passage of the Rubicon 
and entrance into Italy. A vi^ork written with the mere view of justifying a 
modern usui-pation can scarcely be expected to be impartial. 

44. The knot of enthusiasts and malcontents, who had ven- 
tured on the revolutionary measure of assassinating the chief of 
Weakness the State, had made no adequate provision for what 
^'^'^ of the^*^°'^ was to follow. Apparently, they had hoped that 

conspirators, both the Senate and the people would unite to 
seized'by^'^ applaud their deed, and would joyfully hasten to re- 
Antony, establish the old republican government. But the 
general feeling which their act aroused, was not one of rejoicing, 
but of consternation. The noble and rich feared the recurrence 
of a period of lawlessness and anarchy. The poorer classes, who 
were indijEFerent as to the form of the government, provided it fed 
and amused them, looked coldly on the men, who, merely on account 
of a name, had plunged the State into fresh troubles. The nume- 
rous class of those who had benefited ' by Caesar's legislation 
trembled lest his murder should be followed by the abrogation of 
his laws. None knew what to expect next — whether proscription, 
civil war^ or massacre. Had the conspirators possessed among 
them a commanding mind, had they had a programme prepared, 
and had they promptly acted on it, the Republic might perhaps 
have been galvanised into fresh life, and the final establishment of 
despotism might have been deferred, if it could not be averted. 
But at the exact time when resolution and quick action were 
needed, they hesitated and procrastinated. Their remissness gave 
the sole consul, Antony, an opportunity of which he was not slow 
to avail himself. Having secured the co-operation of Lepidus, 
Csesar's Master of the Horse, who alone had an armed force on 
the spot, he possessed himself of the treasures and papers of the 
Dictator, entered into negotiations with the 'Liberators,' and 
while professedly recognising the legitimate authority of the 
Senate, contrived in a short time to obtain the substance of 
supreme power for himself. His colleague, Dolabella, elected 
consul in the place of Csesar, became his tool. The ' Liberators,' 
fearful for their personal safety, despite the ' amnesty ' whereto all 
had agreed^ quitted Rome and threw themselves upon the pro- 
vinces. Antony was on the point of obtaining all that his heart 
desired, when the claims and proceedings of a youth — almost a 
boy — who unexpectedly appeared upon the scene, introduced fresh 



PABT I. PEB. v.] THIRD CIVIL WAR. 445 

complications, and, checking Antony in mid career, rendered it 
doubtful for a while whether he would not fall as suddenly as he 
had risen. 

45. C. Octavius, the youthful rival of Antony, was the grand- 
nephew of J. Csesar, being the grandson of his sister, Julia. He 
had enjoyed for several years a large portion of the Arrival 
Dictator's favour, and in his last testament had upon^the^ 
been named as his chief heir and son by adoption. scene. 
Absent from Rome at the date of Csesar's murder, Senate'against 
he lost no time in proceeding to the capital, claim- Antony. 
ing the rights and accepting the obligations which devolved on 
him as Caesar's heir. With consummate adroitness he contrived 
to gain the good-will of all parties. The soldiers were brought to 
see in him the true representative of their loved and lost com- 
mander ; the populace was won by shows, by stirring appeals, by the 
payment of Csesar's legacy to them out of his own private resour- 
ces j the Liberators, and especially Cicero, who had made common 
cause with them, were cajoled into believing that he had no per- 
sonal ambition, and only sought to defeat the selfish designs of 
Antony. Even with Antony there was established, we cannot say 
how early, an understanding, that the quarrel between the two 
Caesareans was not to be pushed a Voutrance^ but was to be prose- 
cuted as between enemies who might one day be friends. Thus 
guarded on all sides, Octavius ventured, though absolutely without 
office, to collect an army, which he paid out of his own resources, 
and to take up a position, from which he might either defend or 
threaten Rome. Encouraged by his proceedings, Cicero re-entered 
the political arena, and took up the attitude against Antony which 
had been successful against Catiline. By the series of speeches 
and pamphlets known as ^ the Philippics,' he crushed the popularity 
of the proconsul, drove him from Rome, and freed the Senate 
from his influence. Antony retired to his province of Cisalpine 
Gaul, and there commenced the Third Civil War by besieging 
Decimus Brutus, the previous governor, in Mutina. Hereupon 
the Senate bade the new consuls, Hirtius and Pansa, to act against 
him, and, at Cicero's instance, invested the young Octavius with 
the praetorship, and joined him in the command with the consuls. 

46. The short war, known as the ^ Bellum Mutinense,' followed. 
In two battles, one at Forum Gallorum, the other under the walls 
of Mutina, Antony's troops were defeated by the army of the 



446 ROME. [book v. 

Senate, and he himself, despairing of present success, crossed the 

Alps to join Lepidus in Gaul. But the two victo- 

Civil War ^i^s Were dearly won, at the cost of two most im- 

commences portant Hves. Hirtius and Pansa, the two honest 

with the 

* Bellum consuls, both fell ; and Octavius, finding himself the 

Mutmense, g^j^ commander, was encouraged to put aside his 

44-43. reserve and show himself in his true colours. He 

becomes refused to join Decimus Brutus in the pursuit of 

master of Antonv, and thus aided the latter's escape. He 

Rome 

claimed the whole merit of the war, and boldly 
demanded a triumph -, finally, he sent a detachment of his soldiers 
to Rome, to demand the consulship for him; when the Senate, 
alarmed at his attitude, refused these requests, he at once threw 
off the mask, marched with all his troops on Rome, plundering as 
he advanced, and at the head of his legions imposed his will on 
the government. Possessed of supreme power, it pleased him to 
assume the title of Consul, and to give himself, as a nominal 
colleague in the office, his cousin, Q. Pedius. 

The Mutine War began in December, B.C. 44. It terminated with the 
battle of Mutina, April 14, B.C. 43. Octavius and Pedius were proclaimed 
consuls, September 22 of the same year. 

47. It was the policy of Octavius to secure for all his acts, so 
far as he possibly could, legal sanctions. He now therefore re- 
Formation quired and obtained the confirmation of his adop- 
of the tion. Determined to proceed to extremities against 

Second • -^ " 

Triumvirate, the 'Liberators,' he had them attainted, and, as 
B. c. 43. ^YiQy had all fled from Rome upon his entrance, con- 
demned in their absence. A similar sentence was, at his instance, 
passed on Sext. Pompeius. Octavius was made generalissimo of 
all the forces of the Republic, and was authorised to act against, 
or, if it pleased him better, treat with, Antony and Lepidus. It 
was on this latter course that he had long before decided. Only 
by the aid of Antony could he hope to triumph over Cassius and 
the Bruti, whose party in the West was in no wise contemptible, 
and who had all the resources of the East at their disposal. 
Accordingly, Antony and Lepidus were invited to confer with 
Octavius on an island in the river Reno, and the result was the 
formation of the (so-called) 'Second Triumvirate' — the first 
government which really bore the name — a self-constituted Board 
of Three, who were conjointly to rule the State. 



PART I. PER. v.] SECOND TRIUMVIRATE. 447 

The Triumvirs concluded their agreement, November 27, B.C. 43. Its terms 
were: — (i) The establishment of the rule of the Three for a space of five 
years under the title of ' Triumviri Reipublicse constituendae ; ' (2) A division 
of the provinces among the Three — Lepidus was to have Spain and Gallia 
Narbonensis ; Antony the rest of Gaul beyond the Alps and Gallia Cisalpina ; 
Octavius (or Octavian, as he was now called), Sicily, Sardinia, and Africa ; 
(3) A proscription on a large scale, partly to strike terror into the adverse ranks, 
partly to obtain funds for carrying on the war effectively ; (4) The assignment 
of eighteen Italian cities with their lands as settlements for the legionaries, 
when the war should be over ; and (5) Certain arrangements as to the imme- 
diate conduct of affairs. — Lepidus was to receive the consulship and to remain 
in Italy with three legions ; Octavian and Antony were to conduct the war 
in the East, each with twenty legions. 

48. On the opening of negotiations between Octavian and 
Antony, Decimus Brutus had been deserted by his soldiers, and, 
when he attempted to escape from Italy, had been t) i, f 
seized and put to death. The West was thus paci- Decimus 
fied : and the Triumvirs could therefore concentrate -c ^'■"*^^- ^ 

' iiniorcement 

their whole attention, first upon the destruction of of the 
their enemies at home, and then upon the war in the P'^°^'^"P'^io"- 
East. The proscription was relentlessly enforced. Among its 
victims were Cicero, the tribune Salvius, Annalis, one of the 
prsetors, Cicero's brother Quintus, and his nephew, Quintus' son. 
The lists, which followed rapidly one upon the other, contained 
altogether the names of 300 senators and ^,000 knights. The 
property of the proscribed was seized. The soldiers, let loose 
through Italy under the pretence of hunting out the proscribed, 
ravaged and wasted at their pleasure. Private malice obtained its 
gratification with impunity. Numbers were murdered merely 
because they were rich, and their property was coveted by the 
Triumvirs or their creatures. 

49. Early in B.C. 42 military operations were commenced. 
Octavian, whose province of Sicily had been occupied by Sextus 
Pompeius, made an attempt to wrest it from his 

hands ; but his admiral, Salvidienus, being defeated ^^ Triumvirs 
in a naval engagement near Messana, the enterprise ^^'^ *e 

A , , , , , r 'Liberators.' 

was given up. Antony had already crossed from 
Italy to Epirus; Octavian now followed him. Their combined 
forces, which exceeded 120,000 men, marched unresisted through 
Epirus and Macedonia, and had reached Thrace before they were 
confronted by the 'Liberators.' These now brought up the full 
strength of the East against the Western legions ; their legionary 
infantry amounted to 80,000 j their cavalry to 20,000 j and they 
had Asiatic levies in addition. Still, however, their forces were 



4.43 ROME. [BOOK V. 

outnumbered by those of their adversaries; whose legionaries 
were probably not fewer than 130,000^ while their cavalry was 
reckoned at 13,000. 

Brutus and Cassius had departed for the East in the autumn of B.C. 44, 
when their position in Rome became desperate. They were by decree of the 
Senate the lawful governors of Macedonia and Syria. Brutus entered quietly 
on his province; but Cassius had to fight for his with Dolabella, who had 
obtained it from the people after Cassius' departure. Dolabella, having put to 
death Trebonius, proconsul of Asia, one of Caesar's murderers, was attacked 
by Cassius, shut up in Laodiceia, and driven to commit suicide, June 5, 
B.C. 43. From this time the authority of the 'Liberators ' was acknowledged 
generally throughout the East, and they drew freely on the resources of the 
country. 

50. The two armies met at Philippi (the ancient Crenides) ; and 

the fate of the Roman world was decided in a twofold battle. 

Battles at ^"^ ^^ ^^^^ ^S^^ Brutus defeated Octavian, but 

Philippi, Antony gained a decided advantage over Cassius^ 

who, unaware of his colleague's victory, committed 

suicide. In the second, three weeks later, the army of Brutus was 
completely overcome, and he himself, escaping from the field, 
could only follow the example of Cassius, and kill himself. With 
Brutus fell the Republic. The usurpation of Caesar had suspended, 
but not destroyed it. It had revived after his death. The coarse 
brutality of Antony, the craft of Octavian, had separately failed to 
put it down. Conjoined they achieved greater success. The Re- 
public, albeit some of its forms remained, was in reality swept 
away at Philippi. The absolute ascendancy of individuals, which 
is monarchy, was then established. There might afterwards be 
several competitors for the supreme power; and struggles, fierce 
and bitter, might be carried on between them ; but no thought 
was entertained of resuscitating any more the dead form of the 
Republic ; the contest was simply one between different aspirants 
to the supreme authority. 

51. The immediate consequence of the victory at Philippi was 
a fresh arrangement of the Roman world among the Triumvirs. 
Arrangements ^^ Antony preferred the East, Octavian consented 
after the to relinquish it to him ; but it was necessary that 
a e. j^g should be compensated for the sacrifice. His 
colleague therefore yielded to him Italy, and Spain, which last 
Lepidus was required to relinquish, obtaining instead the Roman 
' Africa.' The facile Lepidus submitted readily to the new parti- 
tion; and while Antony received the homage of the East, and 



PART I. FEB. v.] PEACE OF BRUNDUSIUM. 449 

himself succumbed to the charms of Cleopatra at Tarsus, 
Octavian undertook the direction of affairs at the seat of govern- 
ment. 

52. But there was no real cordiality, no mutual respect, no 
sense even of a common interest, among the Triumvirs. The 
Roman world was scarcely theirs before they began q^^\ ^/ar in 
to quarrel over it. Octavian beinsr in difficulties at Italy between 

■r. /- 1 • r ■ . Octavian 

Rome from the scarcity of provisions consequent on and the party 
the attitude of Sextus Pompeius, from the despair of °^ Antony. 
the Italians driven from their cities and lands to make room for 
the veterans, and from the discontent of many of the veterans them- 
selves, whose rewards fell short of their hopes, Antony began to 
intrigue against him and to seek his downfall. The embers of dis- 
content were fanned into a flame by the Triumvir's brother, Lucius, 
and his wife Fulvia^ who shortly put themselves at the head of an 
insurrectionary force, and disputed with Octavian the mastery of 
Italy. The hopes, however, of the insurgents were smothered in 
the smoke of Perusia (b.c. 40) ; and on the return of Antony to 
Italy, the rivals, at the instance of the soldiery, p^^^^ ^^ 
came to an accommodation. Octavian received the Brundusium, 
whole West, including both the Gauls and also Illy- 
ricum • Antony was obliged to content himself with a diminished 
East ; Lepidus kept Africa. Fulvia having opportunely died, the 
' Peace of Brundusium ' was sealed by a marriage, Octavian 
giving the hand of his widowed sister, Octavia, to his reconciled 
colleague. 

53. The pact of Brundusium was modified in the ensuing year, 
B.C. 39^ by the admission of Sextus Pompeius into partnership with 
the Triumvirs. It was agreed that he should retain Treaty of 
Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica; and that he should Misenum. 

r , • A , 1 • • r ^ ■ War of 

further receive Achaea, on condition of his evacuat- Octavian 
ing certain strongholds, which he possessed in Italy. "^* Sextus 
He for his part undertook to provide Rome plenti- b. c. 

fully with corn. This agreement, however — known ^^"^ ' 
as the ^ Treaty of Misenum ' — was never executed. Sextus did 
not receive Achaea, and therefore kept possession of the strong- 
holds. Octavian, in retaliation, encouraged the defection of his 
lieutenants, and received from one of them, Menodorus, a fleet and 
several forts in Sardinia and Corsica. Sextus, upon this, flew to 
arms ^ and a naval war began between him and Octavian, which 



4 go ROME. [BOOK V. 

led, after several turns of fortune, to his complete defeat and 
expulsion from Sicily. 

Details of the Pompeian War. Sextus plunders Campania, and cuts 
off the Roman supplies of corn, B.C. 38. His admiral, Menecrates, defeats 
one of Octavian's fleets near Gumse, while he destroys another, under Octavian 
himself, in the Straits of Messina. Folly of Sextus, who makes no use of his 
victories. Octavian builds fresh fleets, receives 130 ships from Antony, and 
prepares to renew the war, B.C. 37. War renewed in the summer of B.C. 36. 
Lepidus, summoned from Africa, brings a squadron. Victory gained by 
Agrippa over a Pompeian squadron off Mylae, counterbalanced by the com- 
plete defeat of Octavian at Tauromenium. War determined by a great sea- 
fight off Naulochus, where the Caesarean fleet, commanded by Agrippa, gains a 
signal victory. Sextus, in despair, flies to Asia. 

54. But Octavian had scarcely time to congratulate himself on 
his succesSj when he became aware of a new danger. The Pom- 

„ f 11 f peian land forces, which were considerable, opened 

Lepidus, communications with Lepidus, and having, con- 

^'^' ' jointly with his troops, plundered Messana, saluted 

him as their Imperator and ranged themselves under his banner. 

The weak noble, finding himself at the head of twenty legions, 

was intoxicated with his good fortune, and assuming an attitude 

of complete independence and even of hostility, set Octavian at 

defiance. A fresh and bloody struggle would have followed but 

for the prompt boldness of the young Csesarj who, entering his 

rival's camp, unarmed and almost unattended, made an eloquent 

appeal to the soldiers, which was successful. Deserting Lepidus 

in a body, they declared for Octavian ; who degraded his fallen 

rival from the Triumvirship, but spared his life and allowed him 

to retain his office of chief pontiflF. 

Lepidus lived till B.C. 12. He was at first required to reside at Circeii, but 
was afterwards brought to Rome, not so much out of favour, as for his greater 
humiliation. 

^^. With the removal of Lepidus a war between Octavian and 

Antony became imminent. The bond of affinity by which it had 

^ , been attempted to unite the interests of the rivals 

Coolness * 

between had failed. The wild and rough Antony soon tired 

and Antony °^ ^^^ discreet but somewhat cold spouse- and his 

Proceedings roving fancy returned to the voluptuous Egyptian, 

in thrEast, from whom it had strayed for a while. In b.c. 37, 

Bc- on setting out for the Parthian War, he left Octavia 

37—34. 

behind him in Italy; and ere the year e.g. ^6 was 

out, he had reunited himself to his old mistress. Henceforth 

until his death she retained her influence over him unimpaired j 



PART I. PER. v.] PARTHIAN WAR OF ANTONY. 451 

and we must ascribe the deterioration in Antony's character to this 

degrading connection. His great preparations against the Par- 

thians had no commensurate result. After three campaigns, one 

in Media Atropatene (b.c. 36), wherein he acquired no honours^ the 

others in Armenia (b.c. '3^^ to 34), where he was somewhat more 

successful, Antony abstained from military enterprise and devoted 

himself to pleasure. The autumn of b.c, 34 was given up to 

debauchery and dissipation. In the infatuation caused by his 

passion, Antony not only acknowledged Caesarion and assigned 

crowns to his own children by Cleopatra, but actually ceded to 

Cleopatra, a foreigner, the Roman provinces of Coele-Syria and 

Cyprus. Such conduct was no doubt treasonable, and furnished 

Octavian with the decent pretext for a declaration of war, for 

which he had long been waiting. 

Parthian and Armenian Wars of Antony. In B.C. 40, after the fall 
of Brutus and Cassius, the Parthians, under Pacorus, and assisted by the 
Roman refugee, Q^ Labienus, had overrun the East and carried all before 
them. They lost ground, however, in the following year, being attacked by 
Ventidius, one of Antony's lieutenants, who defeated and slew Labienus 
(B.C. 39), and, in B.C. 38, gained a victory over Pacorus. Antony's expedition 
(B.C. 36) was undertaken against Phraates, the brother of Pacorus, who had 
become king. Having allied himself with Artavasdes, king of Armenia, he led 
an expedition into Media Atropatene, which was under another Artavasdes, a 
dependant of the Parthian monarch, Antony penetrated as far as Praaspa, 
the capital, and laid siege to it, but was baffled and forced to retreat. 
His Armenian aUies deserted him, and his retreat was disastrous in the 
extreme. The next year, he made an attack upon Armenia ; and the 
year following, B.C. 34, having again invaded the country, he seized the 
person of Artavasdes and conveyed him to Alexandria, to grace his 
triumph. 

^6. Meanwhile Octavian had been exercising his legions, rais- 
ing his reputation, and adding important tracts to the Roman 
Empire in the West. In b.c. qc; he attacked the „ , 

^ ^^ successes and 

Salassi and Taurisci, nations of the Western Alps ; popularity of 
and in the course of the two following years he ^ avian. 
reduced to subjection the Liburni and lapydes in Dalmatia and 
the Pannonians in the valley of the Save. A new province was 
here added to the State. Octavian himself received a wound ; and 
his popularity, to which he artfully added by causing Agrippa as 
sedile to lavish vast sums on the improvement and adornment of 
the capital^ was now at its height. His good fortune enabled him 
at the same juncture to add a second province to the Empire in 
Mauretania^ which was annexed peaceably on the death of Bocchus. 
Feeling himself assured of his position and of the good-will of the 
Roman people, Octavian now resolved to precipitate the rupture 

Gg2 



452 ROME. [BOOK V. 

with his rival, for which he had been preparing ever since the 
formation of the Triumvirate. 

57. The year b.c. 33 was passed by the rivals in mutual 

recriminations, in threats, insults, and preparations for the coming 

War between Struggle. Antony divorced Octavia with all the harsh^ 

Octavian j^ggg ^Howable bv Roman law ; made an alliance 

and Antony ' •' 

decided by with the Parthians ; collected a vast fleet; levied 
*^ AcUum^ °^ troops throughout all the East ; assembled his arma- 
B.c. 31. rnents on the coast of Epirus, and prepared to cross 
into Italy. Octavian inveighed against Antony in the Senate; 
drove his partisans from Rome ; caused his will to be opened and 
published ; had Cleopatra declared a public enemy ; and, collecting 
together all the forces of the West, occupied the eastern shore of 
Italy with his fleets and armies. For a while the two rivals watched 
each other across the strait. At length, in the spring of b.c. 31, 
Octavian, though his forces were inferior in number, made the 
plunge. His fleet took Corcyra. His ^rmy was safely conveyed 
to Epirus. Both were rapidly directed towards the Ambracian 
Gulf, where lay the fleet and army of his adversary. The work of 
seduction then began. Octavian found little difficulty in drawing 
over to his service one Antonian officer after another, Antony's 
indecision and his infatuation for Cleopatra having greatly dis- 
gusted his followers. These repeated defections reduced the 
Triumvir to a state of despondency, and led him most unhappily 
to accept Cleopatra's fatal counsels. Under pretence of giving 
battle to his adversary's fleet, Antony, on the morning of Septem- 
ber a, B.C. 31, put to sea with the deliberate intention of desert- 
ing his land force and flying with Cleopatra to Egypt. Actium 
was not a battle in any proper sense of the term. It was an occa- 
sion on which a commander voluntarily sacrificed the greater 
portion of his fleet in order to escape with the remainder. We 
can with difficulty understand how Antony was induced to yield 
everything to his adversary without really striking a blow. But 
the fact that he did so yield is plain. He left his land army 
without orders, to fight or make terms, as it pleased ; he left his 
fleet, not when it was defeated, but when it was still struggling 
manfully, and but for his flight might have been victorious. It was 
his desertion which decided the engagement,, and, with it, the fate 
of the Roman world. It is with good reason that the Empire is 
regarded as dating from the day of Actium. Though Antony 



PAKTi. PEE. v.] BATTLE OF ACTIUM. 453 

existed^ and resisted, for nearly a year longer in Egyptj it was only 
as a desperate man, clinging to life till the last moment. From the 
day of Actium Octavian was sole master of the Roman world. 

Conclusion of the Struggle with Antony. When Antony fled, his 
fleet lost heart, and the remainder of it was annihilated. His land force, after 
waiting a week for him to return to it, surrendered. Octavian, having founded 
Nicopolis and spent the winter at Rome, proceeded in B.C. 30 to Egypt, land- 
ing at Pelusium, which submitted to him without a blow. Antony attempted 
to defend Alexandria, and was successful in a cavalry skirmish, but soon after- 
wards suffered a defeat. His fleet and army then deserted him ; and, having 
no resource left, he committed suicide. Cleopatra followed his example ; and 
Octavian, being now master of Egypt, reduced it into the form of a Roman 
province. Anthyllus, Antony's son by Fulvia, Caesarion, Canidius, commander 
of the land force at Actium, Cassius Parmensis, one of Caesar's murderers, 
and several other ' Antonians,' were ruthlessly put to death. 



SIXTH PERIOD. 

From the Establishment of the Empire under Augustus to the Destruction 

of the Roman Power in the West by Odoacer, 

from B.C. 31 to A.D. 476. 

Preliminary Remarks on the Geographical Extent and Principal 
Divisions of the Roman Empire. 

I. The boundaries of the Roman Empire, as established by 
Augustus, may be stated in a general way, as follows: — On the 
north, the British Channel, the German Ocean, the Extent and 
Rhine, the Danube, and the Euxine ; on the east, boundaries of 
the Euphrates and the desert of Syria j on the south, ^ mpire. 
the great African desert ; and on the west, the Atlantic. It 
extended from east to west a distance of fifty degrees, or about 
3,700 miles, between Cape Finisterre and the vicinity of Erzeroum. 
Its average breadth was about fifteen degrees or above 1,000 miles. 
It comprised the modern countries of Portugal, Spain, France, 
Belgium, Western Holland, Rhenish Prussia, parts of Baden and 
Wurtemberg, most of Bavaria, Switzerland, Italy, the Tyrol, 
Austria Proper, Western Hungary, Croatia, Slavonia, Servia, 
Turkey in Europe, Greece, Asia Minor, Syria, Palestine, Idu- 
mgea, Egypt, the Cyrena'ica, Tripoli, Tunis, Algeria, and most 
of Marocco. Its area may be roughly estimated at a million and 
a-half of square miles. 



454 ROME. [book V. 

1. The entire Empire, exclusive of Italy^ was divided into 'Pro- 
vinces,' which may be conveniently grouped under three heads : viz. 
Three groups the Western, or European ; the Eastern^ or Asiatic ; 
of provinces, and the Southern, or African. The Western, or Euro- 
pean, provinces were fourteen in number^ viz. Spain^ Gaul, Germany, 
Vindelicia, Rhastia, Noricum, Pannonia, Moesia, Illyricum, Mace- 
donia, Thrace, Achaea, Sicily, and Sardinia ; the Eastern, or Asiatic, 
were eight, viz. Asia Proper, Bithynia, Galatia, Pamphylia, Cappa- 
docia, Cilicia, Syria, and Palestine • the Southern or African were 
five, viz. Egypt, the Cyrenai'ca (including Crete), Africa Proper, 
Numidia, and Mauretania. The entire number was thus twenty- 
seven. 

3. Spain (Hispania, Iberia), the most western of the European 
provinces, included the entire peninsula, and was washed on all 
-^ sides by the sea excepting towards the north-east, 

or where it was separated from Gaul by the Pyrenees. 

It was subdivided into three> distinct portions^ gene- 
^^^"' rally administered by three different governors, viz. 
{a) Lusitania, or the country of the Lusitani, corresponding nearly 
to the modern Portugal ; {b) Bsetica, the country about the Baetis 
(or Guadalquivir), the modern Andalucia ; and (c) Tarraconensis, 
. . comprising all the rest of the peninsula, {a) Lusi- 
tania was inhabited by three principal races, the 
Gallaeci in the north (Gallicia), the Lusitani in the centre, and 
the Turdetani in the south. It had three great rivers, the Durius 
(Douro), the Tagus (Tajo), and the Anas (Guadiana). The chief 
towns were Augusta Emerita on the Anas, now Merida, and Oli- 
sipo on the Tagus, now Lisboa (Lisbon). (^)Bsetica 
was inhabited by the Turduli towards the north 
and the Bastuli towards the south. Its only important river was 
the Bastis. Its chief towns were Corduba (Cordova) and Hispalis 
(Sevilla) in the interior, and on the coast Gades, now Cadiz. 
^ . (c) Tarraconensis, by far the largest of the three 

larraconensis. ^ ' ^ ^ ° 

subdivisions, comprised the upper courses of the 
Durius, Tagus, and Anas, and the entire tract watered by the Iberus 
(Ebro), Turia, Sucro (Jucar), and Tader (Segura) rivers. It was 
inhabited, towards the north, by the Astures, Cantabri, Vaccaei, 
Vascones, and others ^ in the central regions, by the Carpetani, 
Celtiberi^ and Ilergetes; and, along the east coast, by the Indi- 
getes, Ausetani^ Cosetani, Ilercavones, Suessetani, Contestani, &c. 



PARTI. PEE. VI.] PROVINCES OF THE EMPIRE. 455 

Its chief cities were Tarraco, the capital, on the east coast, now 
Tarragona ; Carthago Nova (Carthagena) ; Cassar-Augusta (Zara- 
goza or Saragossa), on the Iberus ; Toletum (Toledo), on the Upper 
Tagus J and Ilerda (Lerida). In Tarraconensis were also included 
the Balearic isles. Major (Majorca) and Minor (Minorca), and 
the Pityusae, Ebusus (Ivica), and Ophiusa (Formentera) . 

4. Gaul (Gallia), which adjoined Spain to the north-east, corre- 
sponded nearly with the modern France, but included also por- 
tions of Belgium and Switzerland. It was bounded ^ , 

Gaul : 
on the west and north by the Ocean • on the east 

by Roman Germany, Rhsetia, and Gallia Cisalpina ; on the south 
by the Pyrenees and the Mediterranean. It had five principal 
rivers : the Scaldis (Scheldt) and Sequana (Seine) in the north ; the 
Liger (Loire) and Garumna (Garonne) towards the west ; and 
the Rhodanus (Rhone) in the south. Augustus subdivided it into 
four regions : viz. [a) Aquitania, the country of the Aquitani, 
towards the south-west, from the Pyrenees to the Loire j [B) Lu'gdu- 
nensis, to the north-west, reaching from Cape Finisterre to Lyons 
(Lugdunum), the capital; {c) Narbonensis, towards the south- 
east, between Aquitania and the maritime Alps ; and {d) Belgica, 
towards the north-east, reaching from the British Channel to the 
lake of Geneva, (a) Aquitania comprised the basins . . . 

^ ' -^ ^ Aquitania. 

of the Garumna (Garonne), Duranius (Dordogne), 
Carantonus (Charente), and half the basin of the Liger (Loire). 
Its chief tribes were the Aquitani in the south, the Santones and 
Pictones towards the north-west, the Bituriges towards the north- 
east, in the tract about Bourges, and the Arverni to the south-east, 
in Auvergne. The most important cities were Climberris and Burdi- 

gala (Bourdeaux). (h) Lugdunensis consisted of the ^ , 

*^ ^ / V / o Lugdunensis. 

region between the Loire and the Seine, together 

with a tongue of land stretching along the Saone to a little below 

Lyons. Its principal tribes were the ^dui in the south; the Se- 

nones, Parisii, Carnutes, and Cadurci in the interior ; the Veneti, 

Osismii, Curiosolitae, Unelli, and Lexovii upon the coast. The 

capital, Lugdunum, was inconveniently placed at the extreme 

south-east of the province. The other important towns were 

Lutetia Parisiorum (Paris), Genabum (Orleans), and Juliomagus 

(Angers), (c) Narbonensis extended from the Upper 

Garonne on the west to the Var upon the east, lying 

along the Pyrenees and the Mediterranean. Inland it reached as 



456 ROME. [BOOK v. 

far as the Cevennes, the Middle Rhone, and the Lake of Geneva. 
The chief tribes inhabiting it were the Volcae in the west, the 
Allobroges in the tract between the Rhone and the Isere (Isara), 
the Vocontii between the Isere and the Durance, and the Salluvii 
on the coast near Marseilles. Its principal cities were Narbo, the 
capital, now Narbonne, on the Mediterranean ; Tolosa (Toulouse), 
Vienna (Vienne), Nemausus (Nismes), Geneva, and Massilia (Mar- 
. seilles). {d) Belgica lay between the Seine and the 

Scheldt, and extended southwards to the Bernese Alps 
and the northern shore of the Lake of Geneva. It was bounded on 
the east by the Roman Germany and Rhoetia, on the west by Gallia 
Lugdunensis, and on the south by Gallia Narbonensis and Gallia 
Cisalpina. The principal tribes were, in the north, the Caletes, 
Ambiani, Bellovaci, Atrebates, Morini, and Nervii j in the cen- 
tral region, the Suessiones, the Remi, the Treviri, the Leuci, and 
the Lingonesj towards the south, the Sequani, and the Helvetii. 
The most important towns were Noviodunum (Soissons), Durocor- 
torum (Reims), Augusta Trevirorum (Treves), Divodurum (Metz), 
Vesontio (Besan9on), and Aventicum (Avenches, in Switzerland). 

5. Germany (which is sometimes included in Gaul) comprised 
two divisions, the Lower (Inferior) and the Upper (Superior). 

Germany : Lower Germany lay upon the sea coast, between the 
Lower. mouth of the Scheldt and that of the Rhine. It 
comprised Eastern Belgium, Western Holland, and Rhenish 
Prussia as far south as the Ahr. Its chief tribes were the Batavi 
and Menapii in the north ; the Ubii on the Rhine near Cologne ; 
the Eburones and Condrusi on the Mosa (Meuse) ; and the Segni 
in the Ardennes. The principal towns were Noviomagus (Nime- 
guen), Colonia Agrippinensis (Cologne), and Bonna (Bonn). Upper 
Germany was a narrow strip of land along the course 
of the Rhine from Remagen at the mouth of the 
Ahr valley to the point at which the Rhine receives the waters of 
the Aar. It was inhabited by the Caracates, the Vangiones, the 
Nemetes, the Triboci, and the Rauraci. The principal cities 
were Ad Confluentes (Coblenz), Mogontiacum (Mayence), Borbe- 
tomagus (Worms), Argentoratum (Strasburg), and Augusta Raura- 
corum (Basle). 

6. Vindelicia, or the country of the Vindelici, lay between the 
Danube and the Bavarian Alps. It corresponded nearly with 
Bavaria south of the Danube, including however a corner between 



PART I. PEE. VI.] PROVINCES OF THE EMPIRE. 457 

the Rhine and the Upper Danube which now belongs to Wurtem- 
berg and Baden. It was inhabited, towards the • •, . . 
north, by the Vindelici, towards the south, by the 
Brigantes. The chief cities were Augusta Vindelicorum (Augs- 
burg) and Brigantia on the Lake of Constance (Bregenz). 

7. Rhsetia lay south of Vindelicia and east of the country of the 
Helvetii. It included the modern Tyrol, the Vorarlberg, and the 
part of Switzerland known as the Grisons. Among . 

its tribes were, besides the Rhseti, the Venostes, 
Vennones, Brixentes, Tridentini, Medoaci, &:c. Its chief cities 
were Veldidena (Wilten, near Inspriick), Curia (Chur or Coire), 
and Tridentum (Trent). 

8. Noricum, which lay east of Vindelicia and Rhaetia, stretched 
along the Danube from its junction with the Inn to 

a point a little above Vienna. It comprised Styria, 

Carinthia, and the greater part of Austria Proper. The chief 

cities were Juvavia (Salzburg) and Boiodurum (Passau). 

9. Pannonia, one of the most important of the Roman pro- 
vinces^ lay east and partly south of Noricum. It was bounded on 
two sides, the north and east, by the Danube, which 

,. /-. ,, 11111 Pannonia : 

in this part or its course makes the remarkable bend 
to the south by which its lower is thrown three degrees south of 
its upper course. On the west an artifical line divided Pannonia 
from Noricum- on the south it was separated from Illyricum by 
the mountains directly south of the valley of the Save. It thus 
comprised all Hungary south of the Danube, together with all 
Slavonia, and parts of Austria Proper, of Styria, Croatia, and 
Bosnia. It was divided, like Germany, into Upper and Lower. 
Upper Pannonia adjoined Noricum, extending along 

Upper. 

the Danube from a little above Vienna to the mouth 
of the Arrabo (Raab). Its chief tribes were the Boii in the north, 
the Latovici, Jassii, and Colapini in the south, along the course of 
the Save. The principal towns were Vindobona (Vienna) and 
Carnuntum on the Danube, Siscia (Zissek) on the Save, and 
^mona (Laybach) between the Save and the Alpes Juliae. Lower 
Pannonia lay along the Danube from the mouth of 

•' ° Lower. 

the Arrabo to that of the Save. Its most important 
cities were Acincum (Buda-Pesth) and Acimincum (Peterwardin) 
on the Danube, Mursa (Esseg) on the Drave, and on the Save 
Sirmium (Zabatz or Alt-Schabaaz) and Taurunum (Semlin). 



458 ROME. [book v. 

10. Moesia was the last of the Danubian provinces. It lay 
along the river from its junction with the Save to its mouth, 

extending southwards to the line of the Balkan. Its 

western boundary, which separated it from Illyria, 

was the course of the Drinus (Drina). It corresponded thus aJmost 

exactly to the modern Servia and Bulgaria. The Romans 

divided it, like Pannonia, into Superior and Inferior. Moesia 

Superior reached from the Drinus and the mouth of 

Upper. 

the Save to the little river Cebrus or Ciabrus (Ischia), 

whence a line drawn southward separated it from Moesia Inferior. 
It comprised thus Servia and a part of Western Bulgaria. The 
chief towns were Singidunum (Belgrade) and Naissus (Nissa). 
Moesia Inferior, a longer but a narrower tract, 
stretched from the Ciabrus to the mouth of the great 
river. It comprised about nine-tenths of the modern Bulgaria^ to- 
gether with a small portion of Roumelia. The chief towns were 
Dorostolum (Silistria) and Axiopolis (Rassova) on the Danube, 
and Odessus (Varna), Tomi (Tomisvar), and Istrus (Kustendjeh), 
on the coast of the Euxine. 

11. Illyricum lay along the western shore of the Adriatic from 
the peninsula of Istria to Aulon (Avlona) in Epirus. It thus com- 

„ . prised the present Montenegro, the Herzegovina, 

Illyricum. <-> ■> a j 

and the greater part of Albania. The more northern 
portion of Illyricum was known as Dalmatia, the more southern 
as Illyria Proper. Among the principal tribes inhabiting it were 
the lapydes and Liburni in the north ; the Breuci, Mazsei, Dsesi- 
tiatse, and Deimates in the mid region ; and the Autariatae, Par- 
thini, and Taulantii in the south. Its chief towns were Scardona 
(which retains its name), Narona on the Naro (Narenta), 
Epidaurus on the Gulf of Cattaro, Scodra (Scutari, on the Bojana), 
Lissus (Lesch or Alessio, on the Drin), Dyrrhachium (Durazzo), 
and Appollonia (Pollina). These were all situated on or near the 
coast. 

13. Macedonia lay south of Illyricum and Moesia Superior, and 
extended across the peninsula from the Adriatic to the ^Egean. 

, . On the east it was bounded by Thrace, the line of 

Macedonia. ■' ' 

separation being the river Nestus. On the south an 
artificial line, carried from the Ambracian to the Maliac Gulf, 
divided it from Achsea. It comprised, besides the ancient Mace- 
don, most of Epirus and the whole of Thessaly. Its chief towns 



PARTI. PER. VI.] PROVINCES OF THE EMPIRE. 459 

were Nicopolis, on the Gulf of Ambracia or Actium, built by 
Augustus to celebrate his victory ; Edessa, Pella, Beroea, Thessa- 
lonica, and Philippi. 

1 3. South of Moesia Inferior and east of Macedonia was Thrace, 
which under the first Csesars still retained a semi-independent 
position, being governed by kings of its own, Rhes- 

caporis, and others ; but was reduced into the form 

of a province by Claudius. The principal tribes in Roman times 

were the Odrysse, the Bessi, and the Coeletae. The cities of most 

importance were Byzantium and Apollonia (Sizeboli) upon the 

coast, and Philippolis (Filibe), and afterwards Hadrianopolis, in the 

interior. 

14. Achaea lay directly south of Macedonia, corresponding almost 
exactly with the modern Kingdom of Greece. It 

A.Cri3B3, 

included the Ionian islands and the Cyclades, but 

not Crete, which belonged to the Cyrenai'ca. The chief towns 

were Patrae (Patras), Corinth, and Athens. 

15. The Eastern or Asiatic provinces have now to be briefly 
described. As already stated (p. 454), they were ^ 

eight in number, viz. Asia Proper, Bithynia, Galatia, or 

Pamphylia, Cappadocia, Cilicia, Syria, and Palestine. siatic. 

16. Asia Proper, which included the ancient Mysia, Lydia, 
Caria, and a part of Phrygia, occupied the whole western coast of 
Asia Minor, extending from the Cianian Gulf in . . ^ 

• /^ in r-r.11 T -^^'^ Proper. 

the Propontis to Caunus on the Sea of Rhodes. In- 
land it reached to about the 32nd degree of East Longitude, where 
it adjoined Galatia and Cappadocia. Bithynia bounded it on the 
north, Pamphylia on the south. The Roman capital of Asia Proper 
was Ephesus ; but the following towns were of almost equal import- 
ance ; Smyrna, Pergamus, Sardis, Apameia Cibotus, and Synnada. 

17. Bithynia, which lay north, or rather north-east, of 'Asia,' 
had nearly its old dimensions, extending along the coast from the 
mouth of the Macestus on the west to that of the ^ , 

. Til 1 1 !• 1 Bithyma. 

Parthenius upon the east. Inland it reached a little 
south of the 40th parallel, being bounded towards the south-east 
by the upper course of the Sangarius (Sakkariyeh), which separated 
it from both 'Asia' and Galatia. Its Roman capital was Nico- 
media (now Ismid), in the inner recess of the Gulf of Astacus. Its 
other important cities were Nicaea (Iznik), Chalcedon (Scutari), 
and Hcracleia (Eregli). 



46o ROME. [BOOK V. 

i8. Galatia was situated to the east of Bithynia. It included 

the ancient Paphlagonia^ North-Eastern Phrygia^ and a part of 

Western Cappadocia. The southern part of the 
Galatia. . // , , , , ■ i , • tt i 

province, which lay on both sides the river Halys, 

was Galatia Proper, and was inhabited by the three tribes of the 

Tolistoboii, the Tectosages, and the Trocmi. The chief city of 

Galatia was Ancyra (Angora) on the Upper Sangarius. Other 

important towns were Pessinus on the western border, in the 

country of the Tolistoboii, Tavia east of the Halys, in the country 

of the Trocmi, and Sinope on the Euxine. 

19. Pamphylia, situated to the south of ^Asia,' contained the 
four subdivisions of Pamphylia Proper, the region originally bear- 
ing the name (see p. 16), Lycia, Pisidia, and 

Pamphylia. ° vryjy? j 

Isauria. It extended along the southern coast of 
Asia Minor from Caunus to Coracesium, and reached inland to 
the Lakes of Bei-Shehr and Egerdir. Its chief city was Perga in 
Pamphylia Proper ; besides which it contained the following towns 
of note — Xanthus in Lycia, Etenna and Antioch in Pisidia, 
Oroanda and Isaura in Isauria. 

20. Cappadocia adjoined Galatia and Pam.phylia towards the 
east. Like Pamphylia, it comprised four regions : viz. Lycaonia, the 

most western, which adjoined Isauria and 'Asia:' 

Cappadocia. ^ . -n r r ■ 11-1 

Cappadocia Proper, east of Lycaonia, on both sides 
of the river Halys ; Pontus, north of Cappadocia Proper, between 
it and the Euxine- and Armenia Minor, south-east of Pontus, 
a rugged mountain tract lying along the Upper Euphrates. The 
chief city of Cappadocia was Csesarea Mazaca (Kaisariyeh), 
between Mount Arggeus and the Halys. It contained also the 
important towns of Iconium (Koniyeh) in Lycaonia ; Tyana and 
Melitene (Malatiyeh) in Cappadocia Proper; and Amisus, Trapezus 
(Trebizond), Amasia, Sebastia, and Nicopolis in Pontus. 

21. Cilicia lay east of Pamphylia and south of Cappadocia. It 
reached along the south coast of Asia Minor from Coracesium 

to Alexandria (Iskanderoun). The eastern portion 
of the province was known as Campestris, the 
western as Montana or Aspera. Tarsus on the Cydnus was its 
capital. Other important towns were Issus in the pass of the 
name, Mopsuestia on the Pyramus, and Seleuceia on the Caly- 
cadnus, near its mouth. 

23. Syria, which adjoined Cappadocia and Cilicia, extended 



PAKTi. PER. VI.] PROVINCES OF THE EMPIRE. 461 

from about the 38th parallel upon the north to Mount Carmel 
towards the south, a distance of nearly 400 miles. ^ . 

Syria : 

It was bounded on the east by the Euphrates as far 
as Thapsacus and then by the waterless Syrian desert. Southward 
it adjoined on Palestine. The province was divided into ten prin- 
cipal regions : — (i) Commagene, towards the north, _ , , 
between Cilicia and Armenia j chief city, Samosata 
(Sumei'sat) on the Euphrates. (2) Cyrrhestica, south of Commag^ne, 
between Cilicia and Mesopotamia j chief cities, Cirrhus^ Zeugma 
(Rum-kaleh), and Bambyce or Hierapolis (Bambuk). (3) Seleucis, 
on the coast, south of Cilicia and south-west of Cyrrhestica • chief 
city, Antioch, with its suburb. Daphne, and its port, Seleuceia. 
(4) Casiotis, south of Seleucis, so called from the Mons Casius, 
extending along the shore from the foot of that mountain to the 
river Eleuthems (Nahr-el-Kebir) ; chief cities, Laodiceia and Ma- 

rathus. (<) Phoenicia, a thin slip of coast, due south 

r ? Phoenicia, 

of Casiotis, reaching from the river Eleutherus to 

Mount Carmel ; chief towns, Antaradus, Berytus (Beyrut)^ Sidon, 
Tyre, and Ptolemais (Acre). (6) Chalybonitis, south of Cyrrhestica, 
and east of Seleucis^ lying between Seleucis and the Euphrates; 
chief city, Chalybon (now Aleppo). (7) Chalcis or Chalcidice, 
south of Chalybonitis ; chief city, Chalcis, on the lake into which 
the river of Aleppo empties itself. (8) Apamene, south of Chalci- 
dice, and east of Casiotis, comprising a large portion of the 
Orontes valley, together with the country east of it; chief city, 
Apameia; important towns, Epiphaneia (Hamah) and Emesa 
(Hems). (9) Coele-Syria, south of Apamene and east ^ ,,0 • 
of Phoenicia, consisting of the valley between the 
Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon, together with the Anti-Lebanon 
itself and the fertile tract at its eastern base towards Damas- 
cus; chief cities, Damascus, Abila, and Heliopolis (Balbek). And 
(10) Palmy rene, the desert tract south of Chaly- 
bonitis and east of Chalcidice and Apamene, com- 
prising some fertile oases, of which the principal contained the 
famous Tadmor or Palmyra, ' the city of Palms.' The capital of 
the entire Syrian province was Antioch, on the Lower Orontes. 
The most important of the other cities in Roman times were 
Damascus and Emesa. 

23. Palestine, which adjoined Syria on the south, was, like 
Syria, divided up into a number of districts. The chief of these 



462 ROME. [BOOK V. 

were Galilee, Samaria, Judaea, Idumaea, and Peraea, which last in- 

Palestine: cluded Ituraea, Trachonitis, Auranitis, Batanaea, 6cc. 

Galilee. Galilee was entirely an inland region, being shut out 

from the coast by the strip of territory belonging to Phoenicia. It 

reached from Hermon on the north to the plain of Esdraelon and 

valley of Beth-shan upon the south. The most important of its 

cities were Csesarea Philippi, near the site of the ancient Dan, 

Tiberias, on the lake of the name, Capernaum, and Jotapata. 

Samaria, which lay south of Galilee, extended from 

Samaria. 

the plain of Esdraelon to the hill-country of Benja- 
min (about lat. 33°). It reached across from the sea to the 
Jordan, including the rich plain of Sharon as well as the hill- 
country of Manasseh and Ephraim. The chief cities in Roman 
times were Caesarea, upon the coast j Sebaste (Samaria), Neapolis 
(Shechem), now Nablus, and Shiloh, in the interior. Judaea, 
^ , which succeeded Samaria towards the south, occupied 

Judsea. 

the coast line from a little to the north of Joppa 
(Jaffa) to Raphia (Refah). Eastward it was bounded by the 
Jordan and the Dead Sea, southward by Idumaea or Edom. It 
comprised the hill-country of Judah and Benjamin, the desert 
towards the Dead Sea, and the rich Shefelah or plain of the Phili- 
stines. The chief towns were Jerusalem, Hebron, and Joppa (Jaffa). 
Idumaea, or ' Roman Arabia,' was the tract between 
Judaea and Egypt j it included the Sinaitic peninsula, 
Idumaea Proper, and a narrow tract along the eastern coast of the 
Red Sea, reaching as far south as lat. 34°. The chief city was 
Petra. Peraea, or the tract across Jordan, comprised 
the entire habitable country between the great river 
of Palestine and the Syrian desert. The more northern parts were 
known as Ituraea and Trachonitis j below these came Auranitis 
(the Hauran), Galaditis (Gilead), Ammonitis, and Moabitis. The 
chief cities were Gerasa (Jerash) and Gadara. 

34. The African or Southern provinces were six in number: 
Southern viz. Egypt j the Cyrenaica, including Crete ; Africa 

or African : proper ; Numidia J and Mauretania. Of these Egypt 
was by far the most important, being the granary of the Empire. 

35. Egypt, according to Roman notions, included, besides the 
^ Delta and the valley of the Nile, first, the entire tract 

between the Nile and the Red Seaj secondly, the 
north coast of Africa from the western mouth of the Nile as far as 



PARTI. PER. VI.] PROVINCES OF THE EMPIRE. 463 

Parsetonium ; and thirdly, the oases of the Libyan desert as far west 
as long. %^°. Southward the limit was Syene, now Assouan. In 
Egypt Proper, or the Nile valley and Delta, three regions were 
recognised, ^gyptus Inferior, or the Delta, which contained thirty- 
five nomes j Heptanomis, the mid region, containing seven j and 
^gyptus Superior, the Upper valley, containing fifteen. The 
capital of the province was Alexandria j other important towns 
were, in Lower Egypt, Pelusium, Sais, and Heliopolis; in the 
Heptanomis, Arsinoe, Heracleopolis, Antinoe, and Hermopolis 
Magna ^ in ^Egyptus Superior, Thebes, Panopolis, Abydus, Ombos, 
and Syene. 

26. The Cyrenaica adjoined Egypt upon the west, and extended 
along the coast from long. 27° to 19°. It was a 

■1111 1 I- /'•ii V_/yTCI13,lC3.. 

tolerably broad tract, reaching so far inland as to 
include the oasis of Ammon, and perhaps that of Aujilah. The 
chief towns were Berenice (now Benghazi), Arsinoe (Teuchira), 
Ptolemai's, near Barca (now Dolmeta), and Cyrene (now Grennah). 
In Crete, which belonged to this province, the most important towns 
were Gnossus on the north coast, and Gortyna in the interior. 

27. Africa Proper corresponded nearly to the two modern Beyliks 
of Tunis and Tripoli. It extended along the shore from Automalax 
on the Greater Syrtis to the river Tusca (Wady-ez- 

zain), which divided it from Numidia. The pro- 
vince w:. s made up of two very different regions, viz. a narrow strip 
of flat coast reaching from Automalax to the Gulf of Khabs or 
Lesser Syrtis, and a broad, hilly, and extremely fertile region, north 
of the Syrtis and the salt lake known as the Shibkah, the former 
corresponding to the modern Tripoli, the latter to Tunis. The 
chief towns were, in the western hill-tract, Hadrumetum, Car- 
thage, Utica, and Hippo Zaritusj in the low eastern region, 
Tacape and Leptis Magna or Neapolis. 

28. Numidia was, comparatively speaking, a small tract, its sea- 
board reaching only from the Tusca to the Ampsaga, ^, . ,. 

,. r -i -1 Ti,. Ti Numidia. 

a distance of about 150 miles, inland it extended 

as far as the Atlas mountains. Its chief town was Hippo Regius, 

the modern Bona. 

29. Mauretania, the country of the Mauri or Moors, extended 
from the river Ampsaga on the east to about Cape ,, 

r D r Mauretania. 

Ghir (lat. 30° 35') upon the west. It corresponded 

in a measure to the modern Marocco and Algeria, but did not 



464 ROME. [bookv. 

reach so far either eastward or westward. The province was 
subdivided into two portions, which were called respectively Tingi- 
tana and Csesariensis. Tingitana reached from Cape Ghir to the 
mouth of the Mulucha (Mulwia). It took its name from Tingis, 
the capital, now Tangiers. Csesariensis lay between the Mulucha 
and the Ampsaga. The chief cities were Csesarea and Igilgilis, 
both on the Mediterranean. 

30. Such was the extent, and such were the divisions and sub- 
divisions of the Roman Empire under Augustus. During the 

, century, however, which followed upon his decease 

extension of (a.d. 14 to 1T4) several large additions were made 

t e mpire. ^^ ^j^^ Roman territory J these will now require 

a few words of notice. The most important of them were those 

of the Agri Decumates, of Britain, Dacia, Armenia, Mesopotamia, 

and Assyria. 

31. The Agri Decumates fell under Roman protection towards the 
close of the reign of Augustus, but were ^ot incorporated into the 

j^ i Empire till about B.C. 100. They consisted of a tract 
Decumates. between the Upper Danube and the Middle Rhine, 
reaching from about Ingolstadt on the one stream to the mouth of 
the Lahn upon the other, and thus comprising most of Wurtem- 
berg and Baden, together with a portion of South- Western Prussia. 
The most important city in this region was Sumalocenna on the 
Upper Main. 

32. Britain was conquered as far as the Dee and the Wash 
under Claudius, and was probably' at once reduced to the form of a 

Roman province. The chief tribes of this portion 
of the island were the Cantii in Kent, the Trino- 
bantes in Essex, the Iceni in Norfolk and Suffolk, the Catyeuchlani, 
Dobuni, and Cornavii, in the midland counties, the Regni in 
Sussex, Surrey and Hants, the Belgae in Somerset and Wilts, the 
Damnonii in Devon and Cornwall, the Silures in South Wales, and 
the Ordovices in North Wales. The most important cities were 
Camulodunum (Colchester), Londinium (London), Verulamium 
(St. Alban's), Isca (Caerleon upon Usk), and Deva (Chester). 
Under Nero and Vespasian further conquests were made ; and 
under Titus the frontier was advanced as far north as the Friths 
of Forth and Clyde, which thenceforth formed the real limit 
of ' Britannia Romana." The Highlands of Scotland remained in 
the possession of the Caledonii ; and no attempt was ever made to 



PAET I. PER. VI.] PROVINCES OF THE EMPIRE. 465 

conquer Ireland (Hibernia or lerne). The tribes of the north 
were chiefly the Damnii, Selgovae, and Otadeni in the Scotch Low- 
lands; the Brigantes in Yorkshire, Lancashire, Cumberland, West- 
moreland, and Durham ; and the Coritani in Lincoln and Notts. 
The most important of the northern cities was Eboracum (York). 
'3^'>^. Dacia, which was added to the Empire by Trajan, com- 
prised Hungary east of the Theiss, together with the modern prin- 
cipalities of Wallachia and Moldavia. On the west ^ . 

Dacia. 

the Theiss separated it from from the Jazyges Meta- 
nastse, who held the tongue of land between the Danube and 
Theiss rivers. The Carpathians formed its boundary upon the 
north. Eastward it reached to the Hierasus, which is either the 
Sereth, or more probably the Pruth. Southward it was divided 
from Moesia by the Danube. The native capital was Zermizege- 
thusa, which became Ulpia Trajana under the Romans. Other 
important towns were Tibiscum (Temesvar), Apulum (Carloburg), 
and Napoca (Neumarkt). 

34. Armenia, which, like Dacia, was conquered by Trajan, 
adjoined upon the east the Roman province of Cappadocia, and 
extended thence to the Caspian. On the north it 

Armenia. 

was bounded by the river Kur or Cyrus, on the south 
by the Mons Masius, on the south-east by the high mountain-chain 
between the lakes of Van and Urumiyeh, and by the river Araxes 
(Aras). Its chief cities were Artaxata on the Araxes, Amida 
(Diarbekr) in the upper valley of the Tigris, and Tigranocerta on 
the flanks of Mount Niphates. 

'^^. Mesopotamia, likewise one of Trajan's conquests, lay south of 
Armenia, extending from the crest of the Mons Masius almost to the 
shore of the Persian Gulf, and comprising the whole tract between 
the Euphrates and Tigris rivers. Its chief regions were Osrhoene 
and Mygdonia in the north, in the south Babylonia and Mesene. 
In Roman times, Seleucia on the Tigris was its most important 
city. Other places of some consequence were Edessa and Carrhse 
(Haran) in Osrhoene, Nisibis in Mygdonia, Circesium near the 
mouth of the Khabur, and Hatra in the desert between the Khabur 
and the Tigris. 

36. Assyria, conquered by Trajan, and again by Septimius Seve- 
rus, lay east of the Tigris, between that stream and the mountains. 
Southward it extended to the lesser Zab, or perhaps to the Diyaleh. 
The only town of importance which it contained was Arbela. 

H h 



466 ROME. [book v. 



HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 



FIRST SECTION. 

Frovi the Battle of Actium, B.C. 31, to the Death of Commodus, 

A.D. 192. 

Sources. The only continuous history which we possess for this period is 
that of Dig Cassius (books li. to Ixii.), the lost portions of whose work may be 
supplied from the abridgement of Xiphilinus. For the earlier Emperors the 
most important authority is Tacitus, whose Annals and Histories gave a conti- 
nuous account of Roman affairs from the closing years of Augustus to the death 
of Domitian. Unfortunately, large portions of both these works are lost ; and 
no abridgement supplies their place. Much interesting information is conveyed 
by the biographical work of Suetonius (VitcB xii. Ccesarum), in which time has 
luckily made no gaps ; but the scandalous stories told by this anecdote-monger 
are not always to be received as truth. Some light is thrown upon the reigns 
of Augustus and Tiberius by the History of Velleius Paterculus, and on 
those of Galba and Otho by their Lives in Plutarch. The Oriental history 
of the period receives important illustration from the two great works of 
JOSEPHUS (^Antiquitates Judaicm and De Bello Judaico). 

Among monuments bearing upon the time, may be mentioned as of great 
interest and importance the 

Marmor Ancyranum, or Great Inscription of Augustus found at Angora 
(Ancyra), containing his own account of the chief facts of his administration. 
Best edition, that of Mommsen (Res gestae D. Augusti. Berolini, 1865 ; 8vo.), 
in which the fragments of a Greek translation of the document, found at 
Apollonia in Pisidia, are collated. 

Of modern works treating the history of this period, the following are the 
most valuable : — 

HOECK, K., Romische Geschichte njom Verfall der Republik bis zur Follendung 
der Monarchic unter Constantin. Gottingen, 1841-50; 8vo. 

Merivale, Rev. G., History of the Romans under the Empire. London, 
1 860-1 862 ; 7 vols. 8vo. 

Thierry, Amedee, Tableau de F Empire Romainjusqu'a la Chute du Gowverne- 
ment Imperial en Occident. Paris, 1862 ; 12 mo. 

De Champagny, Les Cesars. Paris, 1859 (3rd edition); 3 vols. 8vo. With 
its continuation Les Antonins. Paris, 1863 ; 3 vols. 8vo. 

I. If we regard the reign of Augustus as commencing with the 

victory of Actium, we must assign to his sole administration the 

Reien of ^^^^ term of forty-five years. He was thirty-two 

Augustus, years of age when he obtained the undisputed 

to^A^^D. 14. mastery of the Roman world : he lived to be 

His titles seventy-seven. This long tenure of power, ioined 

and powers. ^ , . , , .,,,,. 

to his own prudence and sagacity, enabled him 
to settle the foundations of the Empire on so firm and solid a basis, 



PART I. PER. VI.] REIGN OF AUGUSTUS. 467 

that they were never, except for a moment, shaken afterwards. 
To his prudence and sagacity it was also due that the Empire 
took the particular shape which in point of fact it at first assumed- 
that, instead of being, like the kingdoms of the East, an open and 
undisguised despotism, it was an absolute monarchy concealed 
under republican forms. Warned by the fate of Julius, the 
inheritor of his position resolved to cloak his assumption of 
supreme and unlimited authority under all possible constitutional 
formalities. Carefully eschewing every illegal title, avoiding 
even the name ' Dictator,' to which unpleasant recollections 
attached frorn its having been borne by Marius and Sulla, he built 
up a composite power by simply obtaining for himself, in a way 
generally recognised as legal, all the various offices of the State 
which had any real political significance. These offices, moreover, 
were mostly taken not in perpetuity, but for a term of years, and 
were renewed from time to time at the pressing instance of the 
Senate. Some of them were also, to a certain extent, shared with 
others — a further apparent safeguard. State and grandeur were 
at the same time avoided ; no new insignia of office were intro- 
duced ; the manners and deportment of the ruler were citizen- 
like. Thus both the great parties in the State were fairly satisfied : 
it was not difficult for republicans to flatter themselves that the 
Republic still existed j while monarchists were with better reason 
convinced that it had passed away for ever. 

The titles and ofRces assumed by Augustus were the following: — (i) That 
of Imperator, or Commander-in-chief, conferred on him B.C. 30, which implied 
the proconsulare imperium, or command of all the provinces; (2) That of 
Princeps Senaius (B.C. 28), which enabled him to lead the Senate by entitling 
him to speak first on all questions which came before it ; (3) That of per- 
petual Tribune, involved in the iribunicia potestas, which he obtained B.C. 23; 
(4) That of perpetual Consul, involved in the consularis potestas, assumed for 
life in B.C. 19 ; (5) That of perpetual Censor, involved in the potestas censoria, 
obtained at the same date ; and (6) That of Pontifex Maximus, taken at the 
death of Lepidus, B.C. 12. The agnomen of ' Augustus/ and the honorary title 
of ' Pater Patriae,' were mere distinctions, conferring no rights. 

2. The chief apparent check on the authority of Augustus was 

the Senate. Retaining the prestige of a great name, favourably 

regarded by large numbers among the people, and p . . 

possessed of considerable powers in respect of taxa- of the Senate 

tion, of administration, and of nomination to high Augustus 

offices, the Senate, had it been animated by a bold and his 

successors. 
and courageous spirit, might have formed not merely 

an ornamental adjunct to the throne, but a real counterbalancing 

H h 2 



468 ROME. [BOOK v. 

power in the State, a barrier against oppression and tyranny. The 
Senate had its own treasury {aranum\ which was distinct from the 
privy purse {fiscus) of the Emperor ; it divided with the Emperor 
the government of the Roman world, having its own senatorial 
provinces {provincia Senatus)^ as he had his imperial ones {pro- 
vincia Casaris) j it appointed ' Presidents ' and ' Proconsuls ' to 
administer the one, as he did his ' Lieutenants ' {legati) to admi- 
nister the other. . It was recognised as the ultimate seat of all 
civil power and authority. It alone conferred the 'imperium,' 
or right to exercise rule over the provincials and the citizens. 
Legally and constitutionally_, the Emperor derived his authority 
from the Senate ; and it was always the acknowledgment of the 
Senate, by whatever means obtained, which was regarded as im- 
parting legitimacy to the pretensions of any new aspirant. The 
Senate was, however, prevented from proving any effectual check 
upon the <^ Prince' by the cupidity and timidity which prevailed 
among its members. All the bolder spirits had perished in the civil 
wars ; and the senators of Augustus^ elevated or confirmed in their 
seats by him, preferred courting his favour by adulation to im- 
perilling their position by the display of an inconvenient indepen- 
dence. As time went on, and worse Emperors than Augustus filled 
his place, the conduct which had been at first dictated by selfish 
hopes continued as the result of fear. Over the head of every one 
who thwarted the Imperial will impended, like the sword of Da- 
mocles, the ^ lex de majestate.' By degrees the Senate relinquished 
all its powers, or suffered them to become merely nominal j and 
the Roman 'Prince' became as absolute a despot as ever was 
Oriental Shah or Sultan. 

The Senate of Augustus was limited to 600 members. It was composed of 
persons whose continuance in it he had sanctioned on those occasions when, 
as Censor, he ' purged the Senate,' or whom he had himself appointed. To 
obtain a seat in it, a property qualification was necessary ; and this was gradu- 
ally raised by Augustus from 400,000 to 1,200,000 sesterces. It was composed, 
not simply of Romans and Italians, but also to a certain extent of provincials. 
Provincial members, however, were obliged to reside, and, in later times, to 
hold landed property, in Italy. 

3. During the principate of Augustus, the ' people ' continued 

to possess some remnants of their ancient privileges. While the 

Gradual Emperor nominated absolutely the consuls and one- 

^^*^T ukr °^ ^^^^ °^ ^^^ other magistrates, the tribes elected, from 

rights. among candidates whom the Emperor had approved, 

the remainder. Legislation followed its old course, and the entire 



PAKT I. PEE. VI.] REIGN OF AUGUSTUS. 469 

series of ' Leges Julias ' enacted under Augustus, received the sanc- 
tion of both the Senate and the Centuries. The judicial rights alone 
of the people were at this time absolutely extinguished, the prero- 
gative of pardon which the Emperor assumed taking the place of 
the 'provocatio ad populum.' But the tendency of the Empire 
was, naturally, to infringe more and more on the remaining 
popular rights ; and, though a certain show of election, and a 
certain title to a share in legislation, were maintained by the great 
assemblies up to the time when the Empire fell, yet practically 
from the reign of Tiberius the people ceased to possess any real 
political power or privilege. 

4. The political power, of which the Senate and people were 
deprived, could not, in so large an empire as Rome, be all exer- 
cised by one man. It was necessary that the Empe- j j^ ^ ^ 
ror should either devolve upon his favourites great a Privy 
part of the actual work of government, or that he "^^"^^ " 
should be assisted in his laborious duties by a regularly constituted 
Council of State. The temper and circumstances of Augustus 
inclined him to adopt the more liberal course; and hence the 
institution in his time (b.c. 27) of a Privy Council {concilium secre- 
tum frincipis)^ in which all important affairs of State were debated 
and legislative measures were prepared and put into shape. The 
jealousy of his successors allowed this institution to drop out of 
the Imperial system, and substituted favourites — the mere creatures 
of the Prince — for the legally constituted Councillors of Augustus. 

The Council of Augustus consisted of the chief annual magistrates, and of 
fifteen Senators elected by the rest of the Senate for a period of six months. 
It was thus a sort of standing Committee of the Senate. 

5. As it was the object of Augustus to conceal, so far as possible, 
the greatness of the change which his measures effected in the 
government, the magistrates of the Republic were 

in almost every instance maintained, though with of q\^ ^nd 
powers greatly diminished. The State had still its creation of 

'^ *^ •' new offices. 

consuls, prxtors, questors, asdiles^ and tribunes ; but 
these magistracies conveyed dignity rather than authority, and 
were coveted chiefly as distinctions. The really important offices 
were certain new ones, which the changed condition of affairs 
rendered necessary ; as especially, the ' praefecture of the city ' 
[prafectura urhis)^ an office restored from the old regal times, and 
the command ership of the praetorian guard {prafectura cohortium 



470 ROME. [book v. 

pratoriarum), which became shortly the second dignity in the 
State. 

The Praetorian Guard instituted by Augustus for the security of his person, 
comprised ten cohorts of a thousand men each. It consisted exclusively of 
Italian soldiers, and included both horse and foot. Three cohorts only were 
quartered in Rome — the remainder were dispersed among the neighbouring 
cities. Tiberius collected the whole body in a camp just outside the walls 
of Rorne. 

5. It was^ indeed, in the military rather than in the civil 
institutions of the Empire, that something like a real check 
Power of e?:isted upon the caprices of arbitrary power, so that 
the army. misgovernment beyond a certain point was rendered 
dangerous. The security of the Empire against both external and 
internal foes required the maintenance of a standing army of great 
magnitude ^ and the necessity of conciliating the affections, or at 
least retaining the respect, of this armed force imposed limits, 
that few but madmen overstepped, on the Imperial liberty of 
action. Not only had the Praetorians' and their officers to be 
kept in good humour, but the five^and-twenty or thirty legions 
upon the frontiers — no carpet soldiers^ but hardy troops, the real 
salt of the Roman world — had to be favourably impressed, if an 
Emperor wished to feel himself securely seated upon his throne. 
This check was the more valuable, as, practically, none other 
existed. It sufficed, during the period with which we are here 
more especially concerned — that from Augustus to Commodus — 
to render good government the rule, and tyranny the compara- 
tively rare exception, only about fifty-seven years out of the 223 
having been years of suffisring and oppression. 

7. The organisation of the army was somewhat complicated. 
The entire military force may be divided under the two heads of 
Its those troops which preserved order at Rome, and those 

organisation, which maintained the terror of the Roman name in 
the provinces. The troops of the capital were of two kinds: 
{a) the Praetorians, of whom an account has already been given 
{supra.^ § 5), and (^) the 'City cohorts' [cohortes urhana), a sort of 
armed police, whose number in the time of Augustus was 5,ooo. 
The troops maintained in the provinces were likewise of two 
kinds: [c) those of the regular army, or the legionaries, and 
{d) the irregulars, who were called 'auxilia,' i. e. auxiliaries. 
The legions constituted the main strength of the system. They 
were 'divisions,' not 'regiments.' Each of them comprised the 



PARTI. PER. VI.] REIGN OF AUGUSTUS. 471 

three elements of a Roman army — horse, foot, and artillery — in cer- 
tain definite proportions, and (in the time of Augustus) numbered 
probably a little under 7,000 men. Augustus maintained twenty-five 
legions, who formed thus a military force, armed and trained in 
the best possible way, which did not fall much short of 175,000. 
The auxiliaries, or troops supplied by the provincials, were about 
equal in number. Thus the entire force maintained in the early 
Empire may be reckoned at 3 50,000 or 360,000 men. 

The legion of Augustus was organised as follows : (i) Infantry — ten ' com- 
panies ' (^cohortes), containing 555 men each, except the first, which was of 
double strength, and therefore contained 1,110 men; total, 6,105 men. 
(2) Cavalry — ten 'troops' (jurmcB) containing 66 men each, except the first, 
which had twice the number; total, 726 men. (3) Artillery — two large and 
ten small 'machinse,' with a sufficiency of men to work them, number 
unknown ; probably not less than 70. Total (probable) strength of the entire 
legion, 6,901. 

8. The disposition of the legions varied from time to time, but 
only within somewhat narrow limits, the military strength of the 
Empire being always massed principally upon the j^. 
northern and eastern frontiers, or on the lines of the of the 
Rhine, the Danube, and the Euphrates, where alone egions. 
had the Romans at this date any formidable foreign enemies. 
Thirteen or fourteen legions usually guarded the northern, or 
European, frontier, distributed in nearly equal proportions 
between the Rhenish and the Danubian provinces. In the Eastj 
from four to seven legions sufficed to keep in check the barbarians 
of Asia. Three legions were commonly required by Spain, which 
always cherished hopes of independence. The important province 
of Egypt required the presence of two legions, and the rest of 
Roman Africa was guarded by an equal number. Two legions 
were also usually stationed in Britain after its conquest. The 
older and more peaceful provinces, as Gallia Narbonensis, 
Sardinia, Sicily, Macedonia, Achaea, Asia, Bithynia, &c., were 
unoccupied by any regular force, order being maintained in them 
by some inconsiderable native levies. 

9. The financial system of the Empire differed but little from 
that of the later Republic, both the sources of revenue and the 
items of expenditure being, for the most part, iden- 

tical. Augustus contented himself, in the main, of the 
with simplifying the practice which he found estab- Empire. 
lished, only in a very few cases adding a new impost. The 
revenue continued to be derived from the two great sources of 



472 ROME. [book v. 

(i) the State property, and (3) taxes; and these last continued to 
be either {a) Direct, or {b) Indirect. The chief expenditure was 
on the military force, land and naval ; on the civil service ; on 
public works ; and on shows and largesses. It is difficult to form 
an exact estimate of the probable amount of these several items ; 
but, on the whole, it seems most likely that the entire annual 
expenditure must have amounted to at least twenty-five millions 
of pounds sterling. 

The principal alterations made by Augustus were: — (i) The substitution of 
a fixed money payment for the tribute in kind previously levied in the pro- 
vinces ; (2) The imposition of the 'vicesima hcereditatium et legatorum, or five 
per cent, legacy duty, payable by all Roman citizens on property left them 
by any other than their next of kin ; and (3) The imposition of restrictions 
on celibacy by the Lex Papta Poppcea, which augmented the revenue by the 
forfeitures incurred under it. Augustus also distributed at his will the different 
items of revenue between the cerarium and ihejiscus (see above, § 2), enriching 
the latter at the expense of the former. 

10. Though it was as a civil administrator that Augustus 

obtained his chief reputation, yet much of his attention was also 

given to military affairs, and the wars in which he 

Augustus engaged, either in person or by his lieutenants, were 
Rh^tir' numerous and important. The complete subjugation 
Arabia, of northern and north-western Spain was effected, 

annoma, c. ^^^^^y by himself, partly by Agrippa and Carisius, in 
the space of nine years, from b. c. 37 to 19. In b. c. 24, an attempt 
was made by vElius Gallus to extend the dominion of Rome into 
the spice region of Arabia Felix ; but this expedition was unsuccess- 
ful. Better fortune attended on the efforts of the Emperor's step- 
sons, Drusus and Tiberius, in the years B.C. ]6 and 15, to reduce 
the independent tribes of the Eastern Alps, especially the Rhae- 
tians and Vindelicians. Two campaigns sufficed for the complete 
reduction of the entire tract between the Lombardo- Venetian 
plain and the course of the Upper Danube, the ' fortress of modern 
freedom.' More difficulty, however, was experienced in subduing 
the tribes of the Middle and Lower Danube. In Noricum, Pan- 
nonia, and Moesia, a gallant spirit of independence showed itself ; 
and it was only after frequent revolts that the subjugation of these 
tracts was effected (between B.C. 12 and a.d. 9). 

I J. But the most important of all the Roman wars of this 
period was that with the Germans. The rapid conquest of Gaul 
and of the tracts south of the Danube encouraged the Romans 
to hope for similar success against the tribes who dwelt in Central 



PART I. PER. VT.] REIGN OF AUGUSTUS. 473 

Europe, between the Danube and the Baltic. In a military point 
of view, it would have been a vast gain, could they 
have advanced their frontier to the line of the the attempt 
Vistula and the Dniestr. Augustus seems to have J^ subdue 
conceived such a design. Accordingly, from about 
the year b.c. 12, systematic efforts were made for the subjugation 
of the German races east of the Rhine and north of the Danube, 
the Usipetes, Chatti, Sigambri, Suevi, Cherusci, Marcomanni, &c. 
From the year b.c. 12 to a. d. 5^ a continuous series of attacks was 
directed against these nations, first by Drusus, and then, after his 
death (b.c. 9), by Tiberius. Vast armies penetrated deep into the 
interior • fleets coasted the northern shore and ascended the great 
rivers to co-operate with the land force ; forts were erected ; the 
Roman language and laws were introduced j and the entire tract 
between the Rhine and the Elbe was brought into apparent sub- 
jection. But the real spirit of the nation was unsubdued. After 
a brief period of sullen submission (a.d. 5 to 8), revolt suddenly 
broke out (a.d. 9). Arminius^ a prince of the Cherusci, took the 
lead. The Romans were attacked^ three entire legions under 
Varus destroyed, and German independence recovered. Hence- 
forth, though Rome sometimes, in ostentation, or as a measure 
of precaution, marched her armies into the district between the 
Rhine and the Elbe, yet no attempt was made at conquest or per- 
manent occupation. The Rhine and Danube became the recog- 
nised limits of the Empire, and, except the Agri Decumates, 
Rome held no land on the right bank of the former river. 

Details of the War with. Germany. The war began with an attack 
by Drusus in B.C. 12, which was chiefly from the sea-board, and had no great 
success. Fresh expeditions were made, however, by land, in B.C. 11 and 9, 
under the conduct of the same prince, and in these he had better fortune. 
He reduced the Chatti, caused the Marcomanni to retire eastward, ravaged the 
country of the Cherusci, and reached (b.c. ii) the banks of the Weser, and 
(b.c 9) those of the Elbe. He died, however, in the last-named year, from 
the effects of an accident, on his return from his expedition. The command 
was then assigned to Tiberius, who held it for two years (b.c. 8 to 7), when 
he was succeeded by Domitius -S^nobarbus, who was followed by Vinicius. 
Tiberius then, on his return from Rhodes, once more took the conduct of the 
war (a.d. 4), and making his attack both by land and sea, gained important 
successes. Almost all the tribes between the Rhine and Elbe submitted 
to him. He was proceeding (in a.d. 6) to invade the Marcomanni in their 
new country of Bohemia, when the revolt in Pannonia (see § 10) called him 
off to the recovery of that province. Quintilius Varus succeeded him in the 
command, and, discontinuing warlike operations, applied himself to the organ- 
isation of the submitted territory ; but his measures, which were harsh, dis- 
gusted the populations, and drove them to revolt under Arminius (a.d. 9). The 
destruction of the legions and recovery of independence followed in the same 



474 ROME. [BOOK V. 

year. In A.D. lo, Tiberius for the third time took the command; but his 
efforts were now confined to the mere re-establishment of the honour of 
Rome by incursions across the Rhine, which the Germans did not venture to 
resist. The same course was pursued by Germanicus during the short 
remainder of Augustus' reign (a.d. 12 to 14). 

1 2. The internal tranquillity of Rome was during the whole of 
Augustus' long reign never once interrupted. Revolutionary pas- 

^, . , . sions had to a great extent exhausted themselves. 

Flourishing ° ' 

condition and the prudence and vigilance of the Emperor never 
Romin world relaxed. The arts of peace flourished. Augustus 
under 'found Rome of brick and left it of marble.' He 
iigus u . gg^yg ^ warm encouragement to literature, and with 
such eflpect that the most brilliant period of each nation's literary 
history is wont to take name from him. Virgil, Horace^ Ovid, 
Tibullus, Propertius, Varius, Livy, adorned his court, and formed 
an assemblage of talent never surpassed and rarely equalled. 
Commerce pursued its course securely under his rule, and, though 
a little checked by sumptuary laws^ becaine continually more and 
more profitable. Much attention was given to agriculture- and 
the productiveness of the land, both in Italy and the provinces, 
increased. Altogether, the Augustan age must be regarded as one 
of much material prosperity, elegance, and refinement ; and it can 
create no surprise that the mass of the population were contented 
with the new regime. 

13. The 'good fortune' of Augustus, which the ancients ad- 
mired, was limited to his public, and did not attach to his private 

life. He suffered greatly from ill health, more espe- 

Domestic .,,.,. , . _,, , 1 . ■ j 

misfortunes cially in his earlier years. Though thrice married, 
of Au^stus. — ^Q Claudia, to Scribonia, and to Livia — he had no 

He adopts ^ ' _ 

his step-son, son ; and his only daughter, Julia, disgraced him by 

and^detim^ates ^^^ excesses. His first son-in-law, Marcellus, was 

him as his cut oiF by sickness in the flower of his age j and his 

successor 

second, Agrippa, died when he was but a little more 
than fifty. Towards his third, Tiberius, he never felt warmly j 
and it was from necessity rather than choice that he raised him 
to the second place in the Empire. It was no doubt among his 
most cherished wishes to have been succeeded by one of his own 
blood ; but of the three sons born to his daughter, Julia, the two 
elder, Caius and Lucius, died just as they reached manhood, the 
latter in a.d. 2, the former in a.d. 4, while the third, Agrippa 
Posthumus, was of so dull and stolid a temperament, that not even 



PABT I. PER. vr.] REIGN OF AUGUSTUS. 475 

the partiality of family affection could blind the Emperor to his 
unfitness. Deprived thus of all support from those of his own 
race and lineage, Augustus in his old age was forced to lean 
wholly upon his wife and the male scions of her family. These 
were Tiberius, the son, and Germanicus, the grandson of Livia, 
son of the deceased Drusus. When the aged Emperor, feeling 
the approach of death, resolved to make distinct arrangements 
for the succession, his choice fell on the former, whom he adopted, 
and associated with himself in some of the most important of the 
Imperial functions. At the same time, he required Tiberius to 
adopt his nephew, Germanicus, and gave the latter the hand of 
his own grand-daughter, Agrippina. Augustus lived to see (a.d .12) 
the birth of a great-grandson, the issue of this union, and thus 
left one male descendant, who in course of time inherited his 
crown. 

Special works on the life and times of Augustus were written in the last 
century by Blackwell and Larry ; but these cannot be recommended to the 
reader. Of far greater importance are the following : — 

LOEBELL, Ueber das Principat des Augustus, in Raumer'S Historisches Taschen- 
buch, for the year 1834. 

Weichert, a., Imperatoris Ctesaris Augusti Scriptorum Re/iquice ; Fasc. i. 
Grimsp, 1841 ; 4to. 

14. Augustus died a.d. 14, in the seventy-seventh year of his age. 
There is no reason to believe that his end was hastened by Livia, 
or by any of those about him. His health had long Reign of 
been giving way, and, but for the tender care of his Tiberms, 
attached wife, he would probably have died sooner. 14-37. 
His place was taken, after some coquetry, by Tibe- ^^^^^hf^^^^ 
rius^ with the entire assent of the Senate and people accession. 
of Rome, though not without opposition on the part of the army. 
It is important to observe that, even at this early date, the legions 
had an inkling of their strength, and would have proclaimed an 
Emperor, and drawn their swords in his cause, had not the object 
of their choice^ Germanicus, shrunk from the treason. Tiberius 
was indebted to the generosity of his young kinsman, or to his 
want of ambition, for his establishment in the Imperial dignity 
without a struggle. It is perhaps not surprising that he felt more 
jealousy than gratitude towards one who had been proclaimed 
his rival ; but he cannot be exonerated from blame for so mani- 
festing his jealousy as to make it generally felt, that to vex, 
thwart, or injure his nephew was the shortest way to his favour. 



476 ROME. [BOOK v. 

15. The reign of Tiberius may be conveniently divided into 
three periods : — ( 1 ) From his accession to his retirement from the 

Triple division capital (a.d. 14 to 36=12 years); (2) From his 

of his reign, retirement to the death of Sejanus (a.d. 26 to 31 = 

A.D. 5 years) j and (3) From the death of Sejanus to his 

14-25. Q^^jj (A.D. 31 to 37 = 6 years). The main events of 

the first period were the exploits and death of Germanicus; the 

rise of Sejanus to power ; and the death of Drusus, Tiberius' only 

son. During three years Germanicus attempted the re-conquest of 

Western Germany_, and ravaged with his legions the entire country 

between the Rhine and the Elbe. But no permanent effect was 

produced by his incursions ; and Tiberius, after a while, removed 

him from the West to the East, fearful perhaps of his becoming 

too dear to the German legions. In the management of the East 

he gave him as a coadjutor the ambitious and reckless Piso, who 

sought to bring his administration into contempt, and was believed 

to have removed him by poison. It is perhaps uncertain whether 

Germanicus did not really die a natural death, though his own 

conviction that he was poisoned is indubitable. 

Cappadocia and Commagene were not formally reduced to the condition of 
Roman provinces till the arrival of Germanicus in the East, a.d. 17. Pre- 
viously to this they were Roman dependencies under native kings. Armenia 
continued in this condition. 

16. The rise of Sejanus to power is to be connected with the 
general policy of Tiberius as a ruler, which was characterised by 

a curious mixture of suspiciousness with over-confi- 
Sejanus to dence. Distrusting his own abilities, doubtful of 
power. j^^g right to the throne, he saw on every side of him 
possible rivals — aspirants who might thrust him from his high 
place. The noblest and wealthiest of the Patricians, the members 
and connections of the Julian house, and the princes of his own 
family, were the especial objects of his jealousy. These, therefore, 
he sought to depress ; he called none of them to his aid ; he formed 
of them no 'Privy Council,' as Augustus had done, but resolved 
to administer the entire Empire by his own unassisted exertions. 
Indefatigable as he was in business, this, after a while, he found 
to be impossible ; and he was thus led to look out for a helper, who 
should be too mean in origin and position to be dangerous, while 
he possessed the qualities which would render him useful. Such 
an one he thought to have found in ./Elius Sejanus, the mere son of 
a Roman knight, a provincial of Vulsinii, whom he made * Prse- 



PART I. PEB. VI.] REIGN OF TIBERIUS. 477 

torian Prefect,' and who gradually acquired over him the most 

unbounded influence. 

As with his chief assistant at Rome, so with his lesser assistants in the 
provinces, Tiberius chose them carefully from among those whom he 
did not fear, and then continued them, without change or recall, in their 
governments. 

17. The death of Drusus was the result of the criminal ambition 
of Sejanus, which nothing could content short of the first place in 
the Empire. Having seduced Livilla, the wife of Death of 
Drusus and niece of Tiberius, Sejanus, with her aid, Drusus and 

, , . ^ , . TT- • I • retirement of 

took him oft by poison (a.d. 23). His crime being Tiberius 
undiscovered, he soon afterwards (a.d. 25) requested ^° Capreae. 
the permission of Tiberius to marry the widow. The request 
took Tiberius by surprise j it opened his eyes to his favourite's 
ambition, but it did not at once destroy his influence. Declining 
the proposal made to him, he allowed his minister to persuade him 
to quit Rome, retire to Capreas, and yield into his hands the 
entire conduct of affairs at the capital. 

18. The influence of Sejanus was now at its height, and was 
made use of in two ways — to remove the chief remaining members 
of the Imperial family, and to obtain his own admis- second Period, 
sion into it. By lies and intrigues he procured the ^.d. 

, . • J^ ^ . . , , 26-31. 

arrest and imprisonment of Agrippina and her Fall of 
two elder sons, Nero and Drusus. By pressing his Sejanus. 
claims, he obtained at last the consent of the Emperor to the mar- 
riage whereto he aspired, and was actually betrothed to Livilla. 
At the same time, he was made joint consul with his master. But 
at this point his good fortune stopped. In the very act of raising 
his favourite so high, the Emperor had become jealous of him. 
Signs of his changed feelings soon appeared j and Sejanus, anxious 
to anticipate the blow which he felt to be impending, formed a 
plot to assassinate his master. Failing, however, to act with due 
promptness, he was betrayed, degraded from his command, seized 
and executed, a.d. 31. 

1 9. It might have been hoped that Tiberius, relieved from the 
influence of his cruel and crafty minister, would have reverted to 
the (comparatively) mild policy of his earlier years, -pjjjj-^j period 
But the actual result was the reverse of this. The a°- 

31-37. 

discovery that he had been deceived in the man Reign of 
on whom alone he had reposed confidence, rendered Terror, 
him more suspicious than ever. The knowledge, which he now 



478 ROME. [BOOK v. 

acquired, that his own son had been murdered, affrighted him. 
Henceforth Tiberius became a monster of tyranny, because 
he trusted no one, because he saw in merit of whatever kind at 
once a reproach and a danger. Hence a 'Reign of Terror' 
followed the execution of Sejanus. In the fall of the favourite all 
his friends, all who had paid court to him, were implicated ; in 
the guilt of Livilla, the equal guilt of the other relatives of Ger- 
manicus was regarded as proved. Nero, therefore, Drusus^ and 
Agrippina, as well as Livilla, were put to death j hundreds of 
nobles, men, women, and even children, were massacred. The 
cruel tyrant, skulking in his island abode, issued his bloody de- 
crees^ and at the same time gave himself up to strange and 
unnatural forms of profligacy, seeking in them, perhaps, a refuge 

from remorse. At length, when he had reached his 
. Tiberius dies. . , i , • 

seventy-eighth year, his strong constitution tailed, 

and he died after a short illness, a.d. 37. 

ao. The political and legal changes belonging to the reign of 
Tiberius were not many in number, but they were of considerable 

Legal and importance. Among his first acts was the extinction 
constitutional of the last vestige of popular liberty, by the with- 

duiing his drawal from the ' comitia tributa ' of all share in the 
reign. appointment of magistrates. Their right of selec- 
tion from among the Emperor's candidates was transferred to the 
Senate, and henceforth the tribes met merely pro forr/^a^ to confirm 
the choice of that body. A second, and still more vital, change was 
the usurpation by the Emperor of the right to condemn to death, 
and execute 'without trial^ all those who were obnoxious to him, or 
at any rate all whom the tribunals had once committed to prison. 
A third innovation was the extension of the 'lex de maj estate ' to 
words and even thoughts, and the introduction by these means of 
'constructive treason' into the list of capital offences. It is 
scarcely necessary to observe how these changes tended in the 
direction of despotism, which was still further promoted by the 
establishment of the entire body of Prsetorian guards in a camp 
immediately outside of Rome, for the sole purpose of overawing, 
and^ if need were, coercing the citizens. 

On the character of Tiberius^ the reader may consult the work of A.StAH^^ 
Tiberius. Berlin, 1863 ; 8vo. 

21. The demise of Tiberius revealed a vital defect in the 
Imperial system, viz. the want of any regular and established law 



PAET I. PER. VI.] REIGN OF CAWS. 479 

of succession. Tiberius had associated nobody, had designated 
nobody by his will, had left the State to shift for 
itself, careless whether or no there followed on his /q^. Caligula) 
decease a deluge. Under these circumstances, the succeeds 

o 1 T-» • 1 • 1 11 Tiberius. 

benate, the Frsetonans, and the people might all con- 
ceive that the right of appointing an Imperator, if not even that of 
determining whether or no any new Imperator should be appointed, 
rested with them. A collision might easily have occurred^ but the 
circumstances were fortunately such as to produce a complete 
accord between the three possible disputants. Soldiers, Senate, 
and people united in putting aside any glowing dream of the Re- 
public, and in calling to the throne Caius, the only surviving son 
of Germanicus and Agrippina, whose parentage rendered him 
universally popular, while his age was suitable, and his character, 
so far as it was known, unobjectionable. 

Besides Caius, the only two persons whose connection with previous Impe- 
rators pointed them out to notice were Claudius, the brother of Germanicus, 
and Tiberius Gemellus, the son of Drusus and grandson of Tiberius. But the 
latter Avas too young (he was but 17) to be regarded as capable of discharging 
the duties of an Emperor ; while the former was a recluse, whose existence 
was scarcely known outside the palace. Thus Caius had, practically, no 
rival. 

22. The reign of Caius^ or Caligula, as he is generally termed, 

lasted less than four years (from March, a.d. 37, to January, a.d. 41), 

but was long enough to fully display the disastrous 

effects of the possession of arbitrary power on a Cafus° 

weak and ill-balanced mind. At first mild, generous, ^^'^■ 

37 -11 

and seemingly amiable, he rapidly degenerated into 
a cruel and fantastic tyrant, savage, merciless, and mocking. Dis- 
sipating in a few months the vast hoards of Tiberius, who had left 
in the treasury a sum exceeding twenty-one millions of our money, 
he was driven to supply his needs, in part by an oppressive taxa- 
tion, but mainly from confiscations of large estates, to procure 
which it was only necessary to make a free use of the law of 
' Majestas.' Executions, suicides, exiles followed each other 
throughout his reign in an unceasing succession, the Emperor 
becoming more and more careless of bloodshed. The most 
wanton extravagance exhausted the resources of the State. Not 
content with the ordinary forms of profligacy, Caius lived in open 
incest with his sister, Drusilla. After his own severe illness, and 
her death (a.d. 38), the violence of his feelings, which he had long 
ceased to control, and the strange contrast, which those events 



48o ^ ROME. [BOOK V. 

brought home to him, between his weakness and his strength, his 
unlimited power over the lives of others, and his impotence to 
avert death, seem to have shattered his reason and to have ren- 
dered him actually insane. His self-deification, his architectural 
extravagances, his absurd expeditions and still wilder projects, which 
all belong to the latter half of his reign, have been justly thought to 
indicate that his mind was actually unhinged. The awful spec- 
tacle of a madman absolute master of the civilized world is here 
presented to usj and the peril inherent in the despotic form of 
government is shown in the clearest light. The human suffering 
compressed into Caligula's short reign can scarcely be calculated. 
What would have been the result, had he been allowed to live out 
his natural term of life ? Fortunately for the world, tyranny, when 
it reaches a certain point, provokes resistance. Caius 

His murder. , / , r ^ • 

was struck down in the fourth year of his reign, and 
the thirtieth of his life, by the swords of two of his guards, whom 
he had insulted beyond endurance. 

1^3. This sudden blow, whereby the State was left wholly with- 
out a head, was an event for which the Imperial constitution had 
Importance niade no provision j and its occurrence produced a 
of the crisis, crisis of vast importance for its effect on the Imperial 
constitution itself, which suffered a modification. Two questions 
presented themselves to be determined by the course of events : — 
(i) 'Was the Empire accidental and temporary, or was it the 
regular and established form of government?' And (2) 'In the 
latter case, with whom did it rest, in case of a sudden vacancy for 
which no preparation had been made, to select a successor?' 
The all but entire abolition of the Comitia put the claim of the 
people to be heard on either point out of the question : the deter- 
mination necessarily rested with the Senate or the soldiers. Had 
the Senate been sufficiently prompt, it might not improbably have 
determined both points in its own favour ; it might have restored 
the Republic, or it might have nominated an Emperor. But it 
was unprepared j it hesitated^ it occupied itself with talk; and 
the opportunity, which it might have seized, passed away for ever. 
For the Praetorians, accidentally finding Claudius in the palace, and 
aware of the hesitation of the Senate, assumed the right of choice, 
proclaimed him Emperor, and thereby asserted and established both 
the fixity of the Empire and the right of the army to nominate the 
Imperator. Henceforth for more than half a century the nominees 



PAET I. PER. VI.] REIGN OF CLAUDIUS. 481 

of the army wore the crown, and the Senate was content with a 

mere ratification of the army's choice. 

It was not till the tyranny of Domitian had thrown discredit on the soldiers' 
Emperors that the Senate (a.d. 96) once more took heart, and ventured to 
nominate a sovereign. 

24. Claudius, who succeeded Caius, was his uncle, being the 
younger brother of Germanicus, and thus, though connected with 
the Julian house, not by birth a member of it. His Reign of 
reign lasted between thirteen and fourteen years, from Cl^dius, 
January, a.d. 41, to October, a.d. 54. Though mild, 41-54. 
diligent, and well-intentioned, he was by nature and of his' wives 
education unfitted to rule, more especially in a andfreedmen. 
corrupt commonwealth. Shy^ weak, and awkward, he had been 
considered from his birth 'wanting,' had been debarred from 
public life till he was forty-six years of age^ and had acquired the 
temper and habits of a recluse student. Left to himself, he might 
have reigned respectably j but it was his misfortune to fall under the 
influence of persons grievously unprincipled, whose characters he 
was unable to read, and who made him their tool and catspaw. 
His wives, Messalina and Agrippina^ and his freedmen, Pallas 
and Narcissus, had the real direction of affairs during his reign ; 
and it was to them, and not to Claudius himself, that the corrup- 
tion and cruelties which disgraced his principate were owing. 
The death of the infamous Messalina, to which he consented, 
cannot be charged against him as a crime, for it was thoroughly 
merited ; and the sway of Agrippina, though in the end it had 
disastrous effects, was not without counterbalancing advantages. 
The princess who recalled Seneca from exile and made him her 
son's tutor, who advanced to power the honest Burrhus, and pro- 
tected many an accused noble, cannot be regarded as wholly a 
malign influence. Her fear of suffering the punish- Murdered by 
ment due to her infidelity, and her natural desire to Agnppma. 
see her son upon the throne, led her on at last to crime of the 
deepest dye. She took advantage of her position to poison the 
unhappy Claudius in the sixty-fourth year of his age, and the 
fourteenth of his reign. 

In the reign of Claudius several useful and important works were con- 
structed ; the empire received further consolidation ; and in one direction its 
bounds were considerably extended. Of the ' works,' the most remarkable 
were the ' Aqua Claudia ' and the ' Aqua Aniena Nova,' two great aqueducts 
which brought water to Rome from a distance of forty miles ; the ' Portus 
Romanus,' or new harbour at Ostia ; and the ' Emissarium Fucinum,' or 

I i 



482 ROME. [BOOK V. 

tunnel to carry off the superfluous waters of Lake Fucinus. The consolida- 
tion of the Empire was advanced by changing Mauretania (a.d. 42), Lycia 
(a.D. 43), Judsea (a.d. 44), and Thrace (a.d. 47) from dependencies into actual 
provinces. The extension of the Empire was towards the north-west, where 
Britain was conquered, mainly by A. Plautius, but partly by Claudius in 
person, as far north as a line drawn from the Wash to the mouth of 
the Dee (see above, p. 464). 

25. Claudius left behind him a son, Britannicus, who was how- 
ever but thirteen years old at his father's death. The crown, there- 
j, . r fore, naturally fell to his adopted son, Nero, who had 
Nero, married his daughter, Octavia, and who was, more- 
54-68 over, a direct descendant of Augustus. Proclaimed 
His early by the Praetorians as soon as the demise of his father- 
in-law was known, he was at once accepted by the 
Senate, whom the circumstances of the elevation of Claudius 
(see § 23) had made conscious of their weakness. The feelings 
which greeted his accession were similar to those called forth on 
a similar occasion by Caligula. Nothing but good could, it was 
thought, proceed from the grandson of ' Germanicus, the comrade 
of Lucan, the pupil of Seneca. Nor were these hopes disappointed 
for a considerable time. During the first five years of his princi- 
pate — the famous 'quinquennium Neronis' — all went well, at 
any rate, outside the palace; the 'golden age' seemed to have 
returned; Nero forbade delation, remitted taxes, gave liberal 
largesses, made assignments of lands, enriched the treasury from 
his private stores, removed some of the burthens of the provincials. 
During this period Seneca and Burrhus were his advisers; and 
their judicious counsels produced a mild but firm government. 
His first Within the palace there were, indeed, already scan- 
great crime, ^j^jg ^j^^j crimes : the impatient son and the exacting 
mother soon quarrelled ; and the quarrel led to the first of Nero's 
domestic tragedies, the poisoning of Britannicus (a.d. ^^. This 
was soon followed by the disgrace of the queen-mother, who was 
banished from court and made the object of cruel suspicions. The 
gay prince, passing his time in amusements and debaucheries, 
fell now (a.d. 58) under the influence of a fierce and ambitious 
woman, the infamous Poppasa Sabina, wife of Otho, who consented 
His later ^^ ^^ ^^^ mistress, and aspired to become his queen. 
profligacy At her instigation Nero assassinated first his mother, 
and tyranny, ^gj-ippi^a (a.D. 59), and then his wife, Octavia 
(a.d. 62), whom he had previously repudiated. He now plunged 
into evil courses of all kinds. He murdered Burrhus, broke with 



PAET I. PEE. VI.] REIGN OF NERO. 483 

Seneca, and put himself under the direction of a new favourite, 
Tigellinus, a man of the worst character. Henceforth he was 
altogether a tyrant. Reckless in his extravagance, he encouraged 
delation in order to replenish his treasury ; he oppressed the pro- 
vincials by imposing on them forced contributions, over and above 
the taxes j he shocked public opinion by performing as a singer and 
a charioteer before his subjects ; he displayed complete indiffer- 
ence to the sufferings of the Romans at the time of the great fire ; 
he openly encouraged prostitution and even worse vices j and he 
began the cruel practice of persecuting Jews and Christians for 
their opinions, which disgraced the Empire from his time to that 
of Constantine. After this tyranny had endured for five years, 
something of a spirit of resistance appeared • conspiracy ventured 
to raise its head, but only to be detected and struck down 
(a.d. 65). Fear now made the Emperor more cruel than ever. 
Executions and assassinations followed each other in more and 
more rapid succession. All the rich and powerful, all the descend- 
ants of Augustus, all those who were noted for virtue lost their 
lives. At last he grew jealous of his own creatures, the legates 
who commanded legions upon the frontiers, and determined on 
sacrificing them. The valiant Corbulo, commander of the forces 
of the East, was entrapped and executed. Rufus and Proculus 
Scribonius, who had the chief authority in the two Germanies, 
were recalled and forced to kill themselves. A similar fate 
menaced all the chiefs of legions, who, on learn- Revolt of his 
ing their peril, rose in arms against the tyrant. generals. 
Galba and Otho in Spain^ Vindex in Gaul, Claudius 
Macer in Africa, Virginius Rufus and Fonteius Capito in Ger- 
many, raised the standard of revolt almost at the same time. The 
multitude of pretenders to Empire seemed at first to promise 
ill for the cause of rebellion, and in one case there was actual 
war between the troops of two of them, terminating in the 
death of one (Vindex); but after a while^ by general agreement, 
Galba was chosen to conduct the contest, and, all chance of 
dividing his adversaries being over, the hopes of Nero fell. De- 
serted on all hands,, even by Tigellinus and the Praetorians, he 
was forced to call on a slave to dispatch him, that he might not 
fall alive into the hands of his enemies. Nero died on the 9th of 
June, A.D. 68, at the age of thirty, in the fourteenth year of his 
principate. 

I i 2 



484 ROME. [bookv. 

The chief events in the external history of Rome belonging to the reign of 
Nero were: — 1. The revolt of Britain under Boadicea (a. D. 61), with the 
destruction of Camulodunum and Londinium, and the recovery of the pro- 
vince by Suetonius Paulinus ; 2. The war with the Parthians and Armenians 
waged by Corbulo (a.d. 56 to 63), which advanced Terminus slightly at the 
extreme north-east corner of the Empire ; and 3. The commencement of 
the Jewish war (a.d. 66), in consequence of the oppressive government of 
Gessius Floras. The discipline of the legions was still for the most part 
maintained successfully ; and the superiority of the Roman arms was exhibited 
or confessed on every frontier. 

26. Though the law of hereditary succession in the Empire had 

at no time been formally established^ or even asserted with any 

distinctness under the early Csesars, yet there can be 

extinction ^10 doubt that the extinction of the Julian family by 

of the the death of Nero paved the way for fresh civil 

Julian House. 

commotions, by practically opening the prospect of 
obtaining supreme power to numerous claimants. Hitherto the 
Romans had not in fact looked for an Imperator beyond the 
members, actual or adopted, of a single house. Henceforth the 
first place in the State was a prize at which any one might aim, 
no family ever subsequently obtaining the same hold on power, 
or the same prestige in the eyes of the Romans as the Julian. 

37. S. Sulpicius Galba, who became Emperor in April, a.d. 68, 

by the will of the Spanish legions, and the acquiescence of his 

brother-commanders in Gaul and Germany, was a 

of Gdba, Roman cast in the antique mould — severe, simple, 

^- ^- unbending. He was thus ill fitted to bear rule in a 

68-69. ° 

state so corrupt as Rome had come to be ^ and the 
disasters which followed his appointment might have been antici- 
pated by any one possessed of moderate foresight. His strictness 
and his parsimony disgusted at once the soldiers and the populace ; 
and when Otho, who had hoped to be nominated his successor, 
turned against him on account of his adopting Piso Licinianus, he 
found himself with scarcely a friend, and was almost instantly 
overpowered and slain (January 15, a.d. 69). His adopted son, 
Piso, shared his fate ; and the obsequious Senate at once acknow- 
ledged Otho as Emperor. 

28. M. Salvius Otho, the husband of the infamous Poppsea 

Sabina, was a dissolute noble, who had run through a long course 

Reign of of vice, and who, having exhausted all other excite- 

Tan to April "^^^^s, determined in the spirit of a gambler to play 

A.D. 69. for Empire. Successful in seizing the throne, he 

found his right to it disputed by another of Galba^'s officers, the 



PAJRT I. PER. VI.] GALEA, OTHO, AND VITELLIUS. 485 

commander of the German legions, Vitellius. Nothing daunted, 
he resolved to appeal to the arbitrement of arms, and to bring 
matters to an issue as soon as possible. When in the great battle 
of Bedriacum fortune declared against him, he took her at her 
word, gave up the struggle as carelessly as he had begun it, and by 
a prompt suicide made the Empire over to his rival. Otho died, 
April 16, A.D. 69, after a reign of barely three months. 

39. In exchanging the rule of Otho for that of Vitellius, the 
Roman world lost rather than gained. Otho was profligate, reck- 
less, sensual ; but he was brave. Vitellius had all 
Otho's vices in excess, and, in addition, was vkdHus, 
cowardly and vacillating. He gained the Empire ^P"! to Dec, 
not by his own exertions, but by those of his generals, 
Csecina and Valens. Having gained it, he speedily lost it by 
weakness, laziness, and incapacity. We search his character in 
vain for any redeeming trait : he possessed no one of the qualities, 
moral or mental, which fit a man to be a ruler. What was most 
peculiar in him was his wonderful gluttony, a feature of his cha- 
racter in which he was unrivalled. It is not surprising that the 
Roman world declined to acquiesce long in his rule; for while, 
morally, he was equally detestable with the worst princes of the 
Julian house, intellectually he was far their inferior. The standard 
of revolt was raised against him, after he had reigned 
a few months, by Vespasian, commander in Judaea, Vespasian, 
who was supported by Mucianus. the president of Reasons of 

■^ ^ ■' -^ ^ his success. 

Syria, and the legions of the East generally. The 
analogy of the previous civil contests would have led us to expect 
the defeat of an aspirant who, with troops derived from this quarter, 
assailed the master of the West. But Vespasian had advantages 
at no former time possessed by any oriental pretender. He was 
infinitely superior, as a general and statesman, to his antagonist. 
He had all the ' respectability ' of the Empire in his favour, a 
general disgust being felt at the degrading vices and stupid supine- 
ness of Vitellius. Above all, he did not depend upon the East 
solely, but was supported also by the legions of the central pro- 
vinces — Moesia, Pannonia, Illyricum — troops as brave and hardy 
as any in the whole Empire. Hence his attack was successful. 
Securing in his own person Egypt, the granary of Rome, he sent his 
generals, Antonius Primus and Mucianus, into Italy. The (second) 
battle of Bedriacum, which was gained by Antonius, in fact decided 



486 ROME. [BOOK v. 

the contest^ but it was prolonged for several months, chiefly- 
through the obstinacy of the Vitellian soldiery, who would not 
permit their leader to abdicate. In a struggle which followed 
between the two parties inside the city, the Capitol was assaulted 
and taken, the Capitoline temple burnt, and Flavius Sabinus, the 
brother of Vespasian, slain. Soon afterwards the Flavian army 
stormed and took Rome, defeated and destroyed the Vitellians, 
and, obtaining possession of the Emperor's person, put him to an 
ignominious death. 

30. Though Vitellius did not perish till Dec. 31, a.d. 69, yet the 

accession of his successor, T. Flavius Vespasianus, was dated from 

the I St of July, nearly six months earlier. Vespasian 

Ves^'sian, reigned ten years (from a.d. 69 to 79), and did much 
^•^- to recover the Empire from the state of depression 

69-79. ^ ^ 

and exhaustion into which the civil struggles of the 
two preceding years had brought it. By his general, Cerialis, he 
suppressed the revolt of Germany and eastern Gaul, which, under 
Civilis, Sabinus, and Classicus, had threatened to deprive Rome of 
some of her most important provinces. By the skill and valour of 
his elder son, Titus, he put down the rebellion of the Jews, and 
destroyed the magnificent city, which alone of all the cities of the 
earth, was by her beauty and her prestige a rival to the Roman 
metropolis. The limits of the Empire were during his reign 
advanced in Britain from the line of the Dee and Wash, to that 
of the Solway Frith and Tyne, ,by the generalship of Agricola. 
The finances, which had fallen into complete disorder, were re- 
placed upon a sound footing. The discipline of the army, which 
Otho and Vitellius had greatly relaxed, was re-established. Em- 
ployment was given to the people by the construction of great 
works, as, particularly, the Temple of Peace-, and the Flavian 
Amphitheatre or <^ Coliseum.' Education and literature were en- 
couraged by grants of money to their professors. The exceptional 
treatment of the Stoics, who were banished from Rome, arose from 
political motives, and was perhaps a state necessity. Altogether, 
Vespasian must be regarded as the best ruler that Rome had had 
since Augustus — a ruler who knew how to combine firmness with 
leniency, economy with liberality, and a generally pacifjc policy 
with military vigour upon proper occasion. 

Details of Vespasian's "Wars. (i) War with Civilis, a.d. 69, 70. 
Civilis aimed at establishing an independent Germany on the left bank of the 



PART I. PER. VI.] VESPASIAN AND TITUS. 487 

Rhine. Professing a wish to help Vespasian and injure Vitellius, he gradually 
overpowered the Roman troops which guarded the province, or induced them 
to join him. Not satisfied with this success, he urged the Gauls to follow his 
example, and prevailed on Sabinus and Classicus to proclaim a GaUic Empire. 
But the proclamation awoke no response among the weak and plastic Celts, 
who were satisfied with their position under the Romans. Gaul was easily- 
pacified, and Civilis, after three defeats, was forced to quit his newly-formed 
kingdom and retire across the Rhine. (2) War with the Jews. Vespasian 
was appointed to conduct this war by Nero, a.d. 66. His first campaign was 
in Galilee, a.d. 67. He took Jotapata, capturing the historian Josephus, made 
himself master of Tiberias and Tarichea, and reduced all northern Palestine. 
In the course of the next year, a.d. 68, he advanced southwards to Jericho 
and Csesarea. Inactive during the earlier part of a.d. 69, on account of the 
civil contests, he left the prosecution of the war to his son Titus, when he 
quitted Palestine for Egypt; and Titus, early in a.d. 70, commenced the siege 
of the Capital. Jerusalem was taken, after a desperate resistance, in the 
autumn of the same year ; its inhabitants were massacred or sold as slaves ; 
and the whole city was razed to the ground. (3) War in Britain. Agricola, 
made governor of Britain by Vespasian in a.d. 78, began his career by the 
complete reduction of the Ordovices, the chief tribe of North Wales. He then 
(a.d. 79) attacked the Brigantes and other inhabitants of the tract between 
the Wash and the Tyne, and subdued the island as far as the Tyne and 
Solway, establishing a line of forts across the isthmus which unites England 
with Scotland. (The remainder of the British War belongs to the reigns of 
Titus and Domitian.) 

On the legislation of Vespasian, the student may consult the work of 
Cramer, A. G., D. Vespasianus, si've de 'vita et legislatione T. Flavii Vespasiani 
commentarius. Jense, 1785. 

31. Vespasian had taken care before his decease to associate his 
elder son, Titus, in the Empire ; and thus the latter was, at his 
father's death, acknowledged without any difficulty 
as sovereign. His character was mild but weak j Titus,° 
he cared too much for popularity ; and was so pro- 
digal of the resources of the state, that, had his 
reign been prolonged, he must have had recourse to confiscations 
or exactions in order to replenish an empty treasury. Fortunate in 
his early death^ he left behind him a character unstained by any 
worse vice than voluptuousness. Even the public calamities which 
marked his reign — the great eruption of Vesuvius, which over- 
whelmed Pompeii and Herculaneum, a terrible fire at Rome, and 
a destructive pestilence — detracted but little from the general esti- 
mation in which he was held, being regarded as judgments, not on 
the prince, but on the nation. Titus held the throne for the short 
term of two years and two months, dying Sept. 13^ a.d. 81, when 
he was not quite forty. 

Titus continued Agricola in his British command, and the third and fourth 
campaigns of that general belong to his reign. In these campaigns Agricola 
reduced the Scotch lowlands, and advanced the Roman frontier from the line 
of the Tyne and Solway to that of the Friths of Forth and Clyde. 



A.D. 

79-81. 



488 ROME. [bookv. 

32. Domitian, the younger brother of Titus, though not asso- 
ciated by him in the Empire, had been pointed out by him as his 
successor ; and the incipient right thus conferred 

Domitian, ^^^ with no opposition from either Senate or army. 
8^°'fi ^^ ^ morose and jealous temper^ he had sorely tried 
the affection of both his father and brother^ but 
they had borne patiently with his faults, and done their best to 
lessen them. It might have been hoped that on attaining to a 
position in which he had no longer a rival, he would have become 
better satisfied, and more genial j but a rooted self-distrust seems 
to have rendered him morbidly suspicious of merit of any kind, while 
an inward unhappiness made him intolerant of other men's plea- 
sures and satisfactions. Had he succeeded in gathering real laurels 
on the banks of the Rhine and Danube, the gratification of his 
self-love would probably have improved his temper ; but, as it was, 
his inability to gain any brilliant success in either quarter disap- 
pointed and still further soured him. Morose and severe by nature, 

His tyranny ^.s time went on he became cruel j not content with 

and murder, strictly enforcing obsolete laws^ he revived the system 
of accusations, condemnations, and forfeitures, which had been 
discontinued since the days of Nero ; having decimated the ranks 
of the nobles, and provoked the conspiracy of Saturninus, he be- 
came still more barbarous through fear • and, ending by distrusting 
every one and seeking to strike terror into all, he drew upon 
himself, just as his sixteenth year had begun, the fate which he 
deserved. He was murdered by the freedmen of the palace, whom 
his latest executions threatened, on the i8th of September, a.d. 96. 

Wars of Domitian. (i) War in Britain. Agricola, retained by Domi- 
tian in his command for three years, proceeded in a.d. 83 to attack the Cale- 
donians in the low country north and north-east of the Frith of Forth. 
Having defeated them in several engagements, and explored the character of 
the country, he again attacked them in a.d. 84, defeated their leader, Gal- 
gacus, in a great battle (probably near Forfar), and threatened to conquer the 
whole island. His fleet explored the coast as far as Cape Wrath, and ascer- 
tained the limits of Britain northwards. Further successes were prevented by 
his sudden recall, towards the close of a.d. 84, by his jealous master. (2) War 
in Germany. In a.d. 84, Domitian crossed the Rhine, and made an expe- 
dition in person against the Chatti, which was attended with no important 
success, but served to strike terror into the tribes in this quarter. In a.d. 87 
he attacked the Marcomanni and their neighbours the Quadi and Sarmatae, but 
his arms met with reverses. (3) War with the Daeians. This, which was far 
the most important of Domitian's wars, commenced in his first year, a.d. 81, by 
an incursion of the Daci into Moesia, where they defeated a Roman legion, and 
ravaged the province to the foot of Mount Hsemus. It was not till a.d. 86 
that Domitian made an attempt to avenge this disaster. His troops crossed 



PAET I. PER. VI.] DOMITIAN AND NERVA. 489 

the Danube and invaded Dacia, but were completely defeated by the enemy. 
This defeat was followed in a.d. 87 by a Roman victory; but three years 
afterwards (a.d. 90), a peace was made with this formidable enemy on terms 
disgraceful to the Romans. It was agreed to pay the Dacians an annual tribute 
on condition of their undertaking to abstain from incursions into Moesia. This 
was the first time that Imperial Rome had consented to purchase peace of an 
enemy, 

33. The cruelties of Domitian had thrown discredit on the 
hereditary principle, to which, though it had no legal force, his 
elevation to the principate was, in point of fact^ due. 

The Senate, which now for the first time since the taken of the 
death of Caligula found itself in a position to claim ^sJ^atJ to^ 
and exercise authority, proceeded therefore to elect increase its 
for sovereign an aged and childless man, one whose powers, 
circumstances rendered it impossible that he should seek to impose 
upon them a dynasty. It is remarkable that the Prastorians, though 
they felt aggrieved by the murder of Domitian, and demanded the 
punishment of his assassins, made no opposition to the Senate's selec- 
tion, but tacitly suffered the Fathers to assume a prerogative, which, 
however it might be viewed as legally inherent in them, they had 
never previously exercised. Perhaps the lesson taught by Otho's 
fall was still in their minds, and they feared lest, if they attempted 
to create an Emperor, they might again provoke the hostility of 
the legions. At any rate, the result was that the Senate at this 
juncture increased its power, and by its prompt action obtained 
a position and a consideration of which it had been deprived for 
more than a century. 

34. M. Cocceius Nerva, on whom the choice of the Senate fell, 
was a man of mild and lenient temperament, of fair abilities, and 
of the lax morals common in his day. He was sixty- 
five or seventy years old at his accession, and reigned N^a° 
only one year and four months. For the bloody ^•°- 

Oft — Qft 

regime of Domitian he substituted a government of 
extreme gentleness j for his extravagant expenditure, economy 
and retrenchment ; for his attempted enforcement of antique 
manners, an almost universal tolerance. He relieved poverty by 
distributions of land, and by a poor-law which threw on the State 
the maintenance of many destitute children. He continued the 
best of Domitian's laws, and made some excellent enactments of 
his own, as especially one against delation. When the public 
tranquillity was threatened by the violence of the Praetorians, who 
put to death without trial and without his consent the murderers 



490 ROME. [book v 

of Domitian, he took the wise step of securing the future of the 
State by publicly appointing, with the sanction of the Senate, a 
Adoption Colleague and successor, selecting for the office the 
of Trajan, person who of all living Romans appeared to be the 
fittest, and adopting him with the usual ceremonies. The example 
thus set passed into a principle of the government. Henceforth it 
became recognised as the duty of each successive Emperor to select 
from out of the entire population of the Empire the person most 
fit to bear rule, and make him his adopted son and successor. 

' The adoption practised by the princes of the Julian house was different from 
this, since they chose only from among their own relatives and close connec- 
tions. The act of Galba in adopting Piso (see § 27) was similar in intention, 
but the choice was unhappy. 

<^^. M. Ulpius Trajanus, on whom the choice of Nerva had 

fallen, was a provincial Roman, a native of the colony of Italica 

in Spain. His father had been consul and proconsul ; 

Tr^n, but otherwise his family was undistinguished. He 

^- °- himself had been bred up in the camp, and had served 

98-117. , ^^ 

with distinction under his father. He had obtained 
the consulship in a.d. 91, under Domitian, and had been com- 
mander of the Lower Germany under both Domitian and Nerva. 
Readily accepted by the Senate, and thoroughly popular with the 
legions, he ascended the throne under favourable auspices, which 
the events of his reign did not belie. The Romans regarded him 

as the best of all their princes : and, thou&h tried by 

His character. • 750 i 

a Christian, or even a philosophic standard, he was 

far from being a good man, since he was addicted to wine and 
to low sensual pleasures, yet, taking the circumstances of the times 
into account, we can understand his surname of '• Optimus.' He 
was brave, laborious, magnanimous, simple and unassuming in his 
habits, affable in his manners, genial ; he knew how to combine 
strictness with leniency, liberality with economy, and devotion to 
business with sociability and cheerfulness. And if we may thus 
consider him, in a qualified sense, ' good/ we may certainly without 
any reserve pronounce him ' great.' Both as a general and as an 
administrator he stands in the front rank of Roman rulers, equalling 
Augustus in the one respect, and nearly equalling Julius in the 
other. Though he could not materially improve the Imperial 
form of government, which took its colour wholly from the cha- 
racter of the reigning prince, yet he gave to the government while 



PART I. PER. VI.] REIGN OF TRAJAN. 49T 

he exercised it the best aspect of which it was capable. He sternly 
suppressed delation, allowed the Senate perfect free- 

^ r 1 1- 1/- 11- r • ■ His policy. 

dom of speech, abstained from all interference in its 
appointments, and in social converse treated its members as equals. 
Indefatigable in business, he managed almost alone the affairs of 
his vast Empire, carrying on a voluminous correspondence with 
the governors of provinces, and directing them how to proceed in 
all cases, hearing carefully all the appeals made to him, and some- 
times even judging causes in the first instance. His administra- 
tion of the finances was extraordinarily good. Without increasing 
taxation, without having recourse to confiscations, he contrived to 
have always so full an exchequer, that neither his military expe- 
ditions nor his great works (which were numerous both in Rome 
and the provinces), nor his measures for the relief of the neces- 
sitous among his subjects, were ever cramped or stinted for want 
of means. He extended and systematized the irregular poor-law 
of Nerva j made loans at a low rate of interest to the proprietors 
of encumbered estates; repaired the ravages of earthquakes and 
tempests ; founded colonies ; constructed various military roads ; 
bridged the Rhine and Danube ; adorned with works of utility and 
ornament both provincial towns and the capital. He spent little 
upon himself. His column and his triumphal arch may jjjg „^^gj^ 
be regarded as constructed for his own glory ; but his works, 
chief works, his great Forum at Rome, his mole at Centumcellae 
(Civita Vecchia), his harbour at Ancona, his roads, his bridges, 
his aqueducts, were for the benefit of his subjects^ and justly 
increased the aflFection wherewith they regarded him. If he had 
any fault as a ruler, it was an undue ambition to extend Terminus, 
and to be known to future ages as a conqueror. There were no 
doubt reasons of policy which led him to make his ^x- 

^ ^ His conquests 

Dacian and Oriental expeditions, but nevertheless no real gain 
they were mistakes. The time for conquest was ^otheEmpn-e. 
gone by ; and the truest wisdom would have been to have rested 
content with the limits which had been fixed by Augustus — the 
Rhine, the Danube, and the Euphrates. Trajan's conquests had 
for the most part to be surrendered immediately after his decease ; 
and the prestige of Rome was more injured by their abandonment 
than it had been advanced by his long series of victories. 

Wars of Trajan, (i) War with the Dacians, a.d. 101-106. The war 
was aggressive on the part of the Romans, and commenced with an invasion 



492 ROME. [book v. 

of Dacia in a.d. ioi, which was completely successful. Zermizegethusa, the 
capital, was occupied. The next year a great battle was fought at Tapse, in 
which Decebalus was worsted ; whereupon he sued for peace. Hard terms 
were granted him, a.d. 103. In a.d. 104 he rebelled, and Trajan again took 
the field and carried all before him. Decebalus and his nobles slew themselves. 
Dacia was made into a province, colonies being planted at Zermizegethusa, 
Apulum, Napoca, and Cerna. (2) War in the East. The generally unquiet 
state of the East, and particularly the machinations of the Jews, induced 
Trajan to strike a blow at Parthia. The conflicting claims of the two Empires 
to direct the affairs of Armenia was the nominal ground of quarrel. The war 
began by Trajan's invading Armenia, a.d. 115, and taking possession of the 
country, which he reduced at once to the condition of a province. He then 
rapidly overran and conquered Mesopotamia and Assyria, which he put upon 
the same footing. The next year, a.d. 116, he marched southward, took 
Ctesiphon and Seleucia, and ravaged the Parthian territory as far as Susa. 
But now revolts broke out in his rear. Seleucia rebelled and vcas retaken. 
Hatra (El Hadr) successfully resisted Trajan himself. Retreat from an un- 
tenable position became necessary. Trajan therefore relinquished his most 
southern conquests to a Parthian prince, Parthamaspates, who consented to 
hold his kingdom as a Roman fief, and retired to Antioch, still retaining, how- 
ever, as the fruits of the war, the three new provinces of Armenia, Mesopo- 
tamia, and Assyria. 

A portion of Arabia, the tract about Petra, was also added to the Empire 
under Trajan, by an expedition under the conduct of Cornelius Palma. 

0^6. Trajan, on his return from the East, found his health failing. 

He was sixty-five years old, and had overtaxed his constitution by 

j-j , - the fatigue and exposure which he had undergone in 

Trajan. his recent campaigns. He had nominated no suc- 

with resped: cessor before quitting Rome, and it was now of the 

to the last importance to supply this omission. But regard 

succession j. x / c 

for the constitutional rights, which it had been his 
policy to recognise in the Senate, induced him to postpone 
the formal act as long as possible, and it is uncertain whether 
he did not delay till too late. The alleged adoption of Hadrian 
by his predecessor was perhaps a contrivance of the Empress, Plo- 
tina, after the death of her husband. It was, at any rate, secret 
and informal • and the new throne was consequently unstable. 
But the judicious conduct of Hadrian in the crisis overcame all 
difficulties ; and his authority was acknowledged without hesitation 
both by the army and the Senate. 

Among special sources for the history of Trajan, the most important are 
(i) the Panegyricus of the younger Pliny; and (2) the correspondence be- 
tween the same Pliny and Trajan himself, when the former was governor of 
Bithynia, which forms the Tenth Book of Pliny's Letters. This last, a unique 
remnant of antiquity, gives us an insight which is most valuable, both into the 
character of the particular Emperor and into the general method of Roman 
administration. 

Of modern writers on the reign of Trajan it is only necessary to mention 
FrancS;e, whose Geschichte Trojans und seiner Zeitgenossen (published in 1837) 
has superseded all former works on the period. 



PAET I. PER. VI.] REIGN OF HADRIAN. 493 

0^"]. Hadrian, who succeeded Trajan in a.d. 117, had a reign 

of nearly twenty-one years (from August^ a.d. 117, to July, a.d. 138). 

He was forty-two years old at his accession, and had 

the advantage (as it was now considered) of being Ha^an, 

childless. Distantly related to Trajan, he had served ^■^- 

under him with distinction, and had been admitted 

to an intimacy both with him and with the Empress. In many 

features of his character he resembled Trajan. He had the same 

geniality, the same affable manners, the same power 

° ^ 3 r jjjg character. 

of uniting liberal and even magnificent expenditure 
with thrift and economy, the same moderation and anxiety to 
maintain a show of free government. Again, like Trajan, he 
was indefatigable in his attention to business, and ready to grapple 
with an infinite multiplicity of details j he was a friend to litera- 
ture, and a zealous patron of the fine arts ; though lax in his morals, 
he avoided scandals, and never suffered his love of pleasure to 
interfere with his duties as prince. He differed from Trajan, 
partly, in a certain jealousy and irritability of temper, which 
towards the close of his life betrayed him into some lamentable 
acts of cruelty towards those about his person j but, chiefly, in the 
absence of any desire for military glory, and a preference for the 
arts of peace above the triumphs and trophies of successful warfare. 
Hadrian's reign was marked by two extraordinary novelties : first, 
the voluntary relinquishment of large portions of 
Roman territory (Armenia, Mesopotamia, and As- most of 

Syria), which were evacuated immediately after his Trajan's 
' '■> ■' _ conquests. 

accession • and secondly, the continued visitation by 

the Emperor of the various provinces under his dominion, and his 
residence for prolonged periods at several provincial capitals. 
York (Eboracum), Athens, Antioch^ Alexandria, were in turns 
honoured by the presence of the Emperor and his court. Fifteen 
or sixteen years out of the twenty-one years of his reign were 
occupied by these provincial progresses, which he was the first to 
institute. Hadrian showed himself, manifestly, not the chief of a 
municipality, but the sovereign of an Empire. He made no dif- 
ference between the various races which peopled his dominions. 
With all he associated in the most friendly way j ascertained their 
wishes ; made himself acquainted with their characters ; exerted 
himself to supply their wants. The great works, which he loved to 
construct, were distributed fairly over the different regions of the 



494 ROME. [book v. 

Empire. If Rome could boast his mausoleum, and his grand 
Temple of Rome and Venus, to Tibur belonged his villa, to Athens 
his Olympeium, to Britain and the Rhenish provinces his great ram- 
parts, to Tarraco his temple of Augustus, to Nismes (Nemausus) 
one of his basilicas, to Alexandria a number of his most costly build- 
ings. Hadrian's reign has been pronounced with reason ' the best of 
the Imperial series.' To have combined for twenty years unbroken 
peace with the maintenance of a contented and efficient armyj libe- 
ral expenditure with a full exchequer, replenished by no oppressive 
or unworthy means ; a free-speaking Senate with a firm and strong 
His choice of monarchy, is no mean glory. Hadrian also deserves 
a successor, praise for the choice which he made of a successor. 
His first selection was indeed far from happy. L. Ceionius Verus 
may not have deserved all the hard things which have been said of 
him ; but it seems clear that he was a fop and a voluptuary — one, 
therefore, from whom the laborious discharge of the onerous duties 
of an Emperor could scarcely have been expected. On his death, 
in A.D. 138, Hadrian at once supplied his place by the formal 
adoption of T. Aurelius Antoninus, a man of eminent merit, qua- 
lified in all respects to bear rule. He would perhaps have done 
best, had he left to his successor the same power of free selection 
which he had himself exercised j but the ties of affection induced 
him to require Antoninus to adopt as sons his own nephew, 
M. Annius Verus, together with L. Verus, the son of his first 
choice, L. Ceionius (or, after his adoption, L. ^lius) Verus. 

The only wars of any importance during the reign of Hadrian were one 
with the Roxolani in his second year, A.D. 118, which he terminated by an 
agreement to pay them an annual subsidy; and one with the revolted Jews, 
under Barcochebas, which lasted from a.d. 131 to 135. This war ended with 
the complete defeat of the Jews, their final dispersion, and absolute banish- 
ment from Palestine. It was followed by the establishment of iElia Capitolina 
as a Roman colony, on the site of Jerusalem. 

Our chief sources for the history of Hadrian are his Life by Spartianus 
(contained in the Historice Augusta Scriptores •vt), and XiPHlLlNUS's Epitome 
of the Sixty-ninth Book of Dig Gassius. Much light is thrown on the period 
by his coins and inscriptions, which are numerous. 

Among special works on the history of this prince, written by moderns, the 
following are worthy of notice : — 

WoOG, G. Gh., De eruditione Hadriani Imperatoris et libris ab eo scriptis. 
Lipsiae, 1769 ; 4to. 

FleMMER, J. M., De itineribus et rebus gestis Hadriani secundum numorum et 
scriptorum testimonia. Havniae, 1836; 8vo. 

Gregorovius, F,, Geschichte des Romischen Kaisars Hadrian. Konigsberg, 
1851 ; 8vo. 

38. T. Aurelius Antoninus, the adopted son and successor of 



PART I. PER. VI.] REIGN OF ANTONINUS PIUS. 495 

Hadrian, ascended the throne in July^ a.d. 138. He was fifty-one 

years old at this time, and reigned twenty-three 

years, dying a.d. 161, when he had attained the age Antoi^'^s Pius, 

of seventy-four. It has been said that the people ^•°- 

■' r r 138-161. 

is fortunate which has no history 5 and this was 

eminently the condition of the Romans under the first Antonine. 
Blameless alike in his public and his private life, he maintained 
the Empire in a state of peace and general content, which 
rendered his reign peculiarly uneventful. A few troubles upon the 
frontiers^ in Egypt, Dacia, Britain, and Mauretania employed the 
arms of his lieutenants^ but gave rise to no war of any magnitude. 
Internally, Antoninus made no changes. He continued the liberal 
policy of his predecessors, Nerva, Trajan, and Hadrian, towards 
the Senate ; discouraged delation ; was generous in gifts and 
largesses, yet never exhausted the resources of the treasury • en- 
couraged learning ; erected numerous important buildings ; watched 
over the whole of the Empire with a father's care, and made 
the happiness of his subjects his main, if not even his sole, object. 
Indulgent by temperament and conviction, he extended even to 
the Christians the leniency which was a principle of his govern- 
ment, and was the first Emperor who actively protected them. In 
his domestic life Antoninus was less happy than his virtues de- 
served. His wife, Faustina, was noted for her irregularities ; his 
two boys died before his elevation to the throne ; and his daughter, 
Annia Faustina, whom he married to the elder of his adopted 
sons, M. Aurelius, was far from spotless. He enjoyed, however, in 
the affection, the respect_, and the growing promise of this amiable 
and excellent prince, some compensation for his other domestic 
troubles. With just discernment, he drew a sharp line of dis- 
tinction between the two sons assigned him by Hadrian. Towards 
the elder, M. Annius (or, after his adoption, M. Aurelius) Verus, 
he showed the highest favour, marrying him to his daughter, 
associating him in the government, and formally appointing him 
his sole successor. In the younger (L. yElius Verus) he reposed no 
confidence whatever j he advanced him to no public post j and 
gave him no prospect, however distant, of the succession. 

The troubles, scarcely deserving to be dignified with the name of wars, 
which ruffled the tranquillity of this reign, were principally (i) A revolt of the 
Brigantes in Britain, a.d. 140, which was chastised by Lollius Urbicus, who 
also occupied the tract between the Solway and the Clyde, and erected the 
barrier drawn from the Clyde to the Forth, which was known as the ' Wall of 



496 ROME. [book v. 

Antonine.' (2) A rebellion (probably of the Jews) in Egypt. (3) Troubles in 
Dacia, complicated perhaps by the simultaneous attacks of a new enemy, the 
Alani. (4) Disturbances in Mauretania, where the nomades sought to recover 
lands won by the Romans from the desert. The dates of the Jewish, Dacian, 
and Mauretanian troubles cannot be fixed. 

The chief ancient authority for the events of this reign is the Life of Anto- 
ninus Pius, by Jul. Capitolinus, contained in the HistoricB Augustcs Scriptores 
already quoted (p. 494). This meagre biography is scantily eked out from the 
Epitome of XiPHiLiNUS, who had before him only a few fragments of Dio, from 
EuTROPius, AuRELius VICTOR, and Fronto. The best edition of Fronto 
is that of Aug. Maius. Mediolani, 1815 ; 2 vols. 8vo. 

Of modern works on the period, the most important is that of the Comte 
DE Champagny (already mentioned, supra, p. 466), Les Antonins, which treats, 
however, of the entire period from Vespasian to Gommodus. 

39. M. Aurelius, who took the name of Antoninus after the 

death of his adoptive father, ascended the throne, a.d. 161, at the 

age of forty. He reigned nineteen years, from March, 

Marcus" Aurelius, ^•°* '^^'^o ^^ March, A.D. 180. Although the embodi- 

A-D- ment of the highest Roman virtue — brave, strict, 

161-180. iri-,,- ^'. 

self-denying, laborious, energetic, patient of injuries, 
aflFectionate, kind, and in mental power not much behind the 
greatest of previous Emperors — he had, nevertheless, a sad and 
unhappy reign^ through a concurrence of calamities, for only one of 
which had he himself to blame. His unworthy colleague, Lucius 
Verus, was by his own sole act associated with him in the Empire ; 
and the anxiety and grief which this prince caused him must be 
regarded as the consequence of a foolish and undue affection. But 
his domestic troubles — the loose conduct of his wife Faustina, the 
deaths of his eldest son and of a daughter, the evil disposition 
of his second son, Commodus — arose from no fault of his own. 
Aurelius is taxable with no unfaithfulness to his marriage-bed, 
with no neglect of the health or moral training of his offspring ; 
still less can the great calamities of his reign, the terrible plague, 
and the aggressive attitude assumed by the barbarians of the east 
and north, be ascribed to any negligence or weakness in the 
reigning monarch. He met the pretensions of the Parthians to 
exercise sovereignty over Armenia with firmness and vigour ; and 
though here he did not take the field in person, yet the success of 
his generals and lieutenants reflects credit upon him. When the 
barbarians of the north began to show themselves formidable, he 
put himself at the head of the legions, and during the space of 
fourteen years — from a.d. 167 to his death in a.d. 180 — occupied 
himself almost unceasingly in efforts to check the invaders and 



PART I. PER. VI.] REIGN OF M. AURELIUS. 497 

secure the frontier against their incursions. Successful in many 
battles against all his enemies, he nevertheless failed in the great 
object of the war, which was effectually to repel the northern 
nations, and to strike such terror into them as to make them desist 
from their attacks. From his reign the barbarians of the north 
became a perpetual danger to Rome — a danger which increased as 
time went on. But the causes of this change of 
attitude are to be sought — mainly, at any rate — not Qf ^l^g 
within, but beyond the limits of the Roman dominion. northern 

1-1 nations. 

A great movement of races had commenced in the 
lands beyond the Danube. Slavonic and Scythic (or Turanian) hordes 
were pressing westward, and more and more cramping the Germans 
in their ancient seats. The Slaves themselves were being forced 
to yield to the advancing Scyths • and the wave of invasion which 
broke upon the Roman frontier was impelled by a rising tide of 
migration far in its rear, which forced it on, and would not allow it 
to fall back. At the same time, a decline was going on in the vigour 
of the Roman national life j the race was becoming exhausted ; the 
discipline of the legions tended to relax ; long periods of almost 
unbroken peace, like the reigns of Hadrian and Antoninus Pius, 
produced a military degeneracy ; and by the progress of natural 
decay the Empire was becoming less and less capable of resisting 
attack. Under these circumstances, it is creditable to Aurelius 
that he succeeded in maintaining the boundaries of the Empire in 
the north, while he advanced them in the east, where once more 
Mesopotamia was made a Roman province^ and the line of de- 
marcation between Rome and Parthia became the Tigris instead of 
the Euphrates. 

Details of the Wars of Aurelius. (i) Parthian War, a.d. 162-166. 
On the accession of Aurelius, the Parthians break the peace by an invasion of 
Armenia, a.d. 161, Severianus marches against them, but is defeated and 
slain. VeruS) sent to assume the command (a.d. 162), proceeds no farther 
than Antioch ; but Avidius Cassius, prefect of Syria, and Statius Priscus take 
the offensive. The latter drives the Parthians from Armenia; the former 
invades Mesopotamia, captures Seleucia, Ctesiphon, and Babylon, burns the 
royal palace at Ctesiphon (a.d. 165), and forces the Parthians to sue for peace. 
Peace is granted, a.d. 166, Mesopotamia being ceded to Rome, and Armenia 
restored to its old condition of a semi-independent monarchy. (2) War 
•with the Quadi and Mareomanni, a.d. 167-174. The Quadi and Marco- 
manni ravage Pannonia, cross the Alps into Italy, and reach Aquileia, a.d. 167. 
Both Emperors proceed against them — they retreat across the Alps, In A. d. 
168 the Emperors cross the Alps, and, having provided for the defence of the 
passes, return to Italy. Death of Verus. The weakness of the Roman efforts 
in these two years encouraged a general rising of the tribes along the Danube, 
almost all of whom now took arms, a.d. 169, Aurelius now took post on the 

Kk 



498 ROME. [BOOK v. 

Danube, and remained there, summer and winter, for at least three years — 
probably a.d. 169-172, In a.d. 174 he gains a great victory over the Quadi, 
ascribed to miraculous rain and lightning. On hearing of the revolt of Cassius, 
A.D. 175, he makes a peace or truce. (3) War w^ith the Sarmatians, Mar- 
comanni, Quadi, &c., a.d. 178-180. The Marcomanni break the peace and 
gain successes. Aurelius and Commodus proceed against them, a.d. 178. 
Victory of Paternus, a.d. 179. Death of Aurelius at Vindobona (Vienna), 
A.D. 180. 

The rebellion of Avidius Cassius in Asia vi^as put down without any conflict, 
Cassius being slain by his own soldiers ; but it called Aurelius to the East, 
where he passed portions of two years, a.d. 175-6. 

The special ancient sources for the history of this reign are the Lives of 
M. Aurelius, L. Verus, and Avidius Cassius, in the HistorioR Augusta Scriptores, 
the two former composed by Jul. Capitolinus, the last by Vulcatius Gal- 
LICANUS. Light is thrown on the character of Aurelius himself, from his 
correspondence with Pronto (see p. 496), and his Meditations (Ta eiy kav-vov), 
of which the best edition is probably still that of Stanhope (London, 1697 ; 
4to.) The best edition of the Historic Augusta Scriptores is that of JORDAN 
and Eyssenhardt (Berolini, 1864; 2 vols. 8vo.). 

Among modern works on the subject may be mentioned the following : — 

Bach, N., De Marco Aurelio Antonino Imperatore philosophante ex ipsius Com- 
mentariis scriptio philologica. Lipsiae, 1826 ; 8vo. 

Westenberg, J. O., Divus Marcus, sen dissertationes ad Constitutiones M.Au- 
relii Antonini Imperatoris . Lugd. Bat., 1736 ; 4to. 

Meiners, Ch., De M. Aurelii Antonini ingenio, moribus, et scriptis ; in the 
Commentationes Societat. Gotting., vol. vi. 

40. The eighty-four consecutive years of good government, 
which Rome had now enjoyed, were due to the practical sub- 
stitution for the hereditary principle of the power 

Return to the r • ^- •-ni • u j l 

principle of ^^ nominating a successor. This power had been 
hereditary exercised in the most conscientious and patriotic 

succession. 

way by four successive rulers, and the result had 
Commodus, been most beneficial to the community. But the 
180-192 ^"^"^^ rulers had been all childless, or at any rate 
had had no male offspring j and thus it had not 
been necessary for any of them to balance a sense of public 
duty against the feeling of parental affection. With M. Aure- 
lius the case was different. Having a single dearly-loved 
son, in some respects promising, he allowed the tender par- 
tiality of the father to prevail over the cold prudence of the 
sovereign • and, persuading himself that Commodus would prove 
a tolerable ruler, associated him in the government (a.d. 177) at 
the early age of fifteen. Hence Commodus necessarily succeeded 
him, having begun to reign three years before his father's death. 
Few dispositions would have borne this premature removal of 
restraint and admission to uncontrolled authority. Such a trial 
was peculiarly unfitted for the weak character of Commodus. 
Falling under the influence of favourites, this wretched prince 



PART I. PER. VT.] REIGN OF COMMODUS. 499 

degenerated rapidly into a cruel, licentious, and avaricious tyrant. 
He began his sole reign (March, a.d. 180) by buying a peace of 
the Marcomanni and Quadij after which he returned to Rome, 
and took no further part in any military expeditions. For about 
three years he reigned decently well, suffering the administration 
to retain the character which Aurelius had given it. But in a.d. 
183, after the discovery of a plot to murder him, in which many 
senators were implicated, he commenced the career of a tyrant. 
Delation thinned the ranks of the Senate, while confiscation en- 
riched the treasury. Justice was commonly bought and sold. The 
ministers, Perennis, Prsetorian prefect, and after him Cleander, 
a freedman, were suffered to enrich themselves by every nefarious 
art, and then successively sacrificed, a.d. i85 and 189. Passing 
his time in guilty pleasures and in the diversions of the amphi- 
theatre, wherein 'the Roman Hercules' exhibited himself as a 
marksman and a gladiator, Commodus cared not how the Empire 
was governed, so long as he could amuse himself as he pleased, 
and remove by his warrants all whom he suspected or feared. At 
length, some of those whom he had proscribed and was about to 
sacrifice — Marcia, one of his concubines, Eclectus, his chamber- 
lain, and LaetuSj prefect of the Prsetorians — learning his intention, 
anticipated their fate by strangling him in his bedroom. Com- 
modus was murdered, a.d. 193, after he had reigned twelve years 
and nine months. 

The wars of this reign were unimportant. Clodius Albinus and Pescennius 
Niger defended Dacia against the attacks of the Sarmatians and Scyths. In 
Britain, Marcellus Ulpius re-established the Roman authority over the tract 
between the Solway and the Clyde, which had been again occupied by the 
barbarians, a.d. 184. 

The authorities for the reign of Commodus are (besides the fragments of 
Dio), his Life, by ^lius Lampridius, in the Historice Augusta Scriptores, and 
the History of Herodian, which commences with his accession. (Best edition, 
that of Bekker ; Berlin, 1826; 8vo.) The regular narrative of Gibbon also 
here commences. 

41. The disorganisation of the Empire, which commenced as 
early as Galba, arrested in its natural progress by such wise and 
firm princes as Vespasian, Trajan, Hadrian, and the ^ 

^ c 7 J 7 7 Increasing 

two great Antonines, made rapid strides under Com- disorganisation 
modus, who was too weak and too conscious of his ° * ^ mpire. 
demerits to venture on repressing disorders, or punishing those 
engaged in them. The numerous desertions, which enabled Ma- 
ternus to form a band that ravaged Spain and Gaul, and gave him 

K k 2 



500 ROME. [book v. 

hopes of seizing the Empire, the deputation of 1500 legionaries 
from Britain, which demanded and obtained the downfal of Per- 
ennis, and the open conflict between the Prsetorians and the city 
cohorts which preceded the death of Cleander, are indications of 
military insubordination and of the dissolution of the bonds of 
discipline, such as no former reign discloses to us. It is evident 
that the army, in which lay the last hope of Roman unity and 
greatness, was itself becoming disorganised. No common spirit 
animated its different parts. The city guards, the Praetorians, and 
the legionaries had different interests. The legionaries themselves 
had their own quarrels and jealousies. The soldiers were tired of 
the military life, and, mingling with the provincials, engaged in 
trade or agriculture, or else turned themselves into banditti and 
preyed upon the rest of the community. Meanwhile, population was 
declining, and production consequently diminishing, while luxury 
and extravagance continued to prevail among the upper classes, 
and to exhaust the resources of the State. Above all, the general 
morality was continually becoming worse and worse. Despite a few 
bright examples in high places, the tone of society grew every- 
where more and more corrupt. Purity of life, except among the 
despised Christians, was almost unknown. Patriotism had ceased 
to exist, and was not yet replaced by loyalty. Decline and decre- 
pitude showed themselves in almost every portion of the body 
politic, and a general despondency, the result of a consciousness 
of debility, pervaded all classes.. Nevertheless, under all this 
apparent weakness was an extraordinary reserve of strength. The 
Empire, which under Commodus seemed to be tottering to its fall, 
still stood, and resisted the most terrible attacks from without, for 
the further space of two full centuries ! 

Some excellent remarks on the general condition of the Empire at this 
period will be found in the concluding chapter of Mr. Merivale's Romans 
under the Empire, 

SECOND SECTIOIir. 

From the Death of Commodus to the Accession of Diocletian, a.d. 193-284. 

Sources, (i) Authors : Dio Cassius, as reported in the work of Xiphilinus 
(Lib. Ixiii-lxxx), is still our most trustworthy guide for the general history ; 
but this fragmentary production must be supplemented from Herodian (see 
above, p. 499), and from the Historic Augustce Scriptores, as well as from the 
epitomists, Eutropius, Aurelius Victor, and Sextus Rufus. The works 
of these last-named writers cover the entire space, whereas Dio's history stops 



PART I. PER. VI.] REIGN OF PERTINAX. 501 

short at his consulate, A.D. 229, and Herodian's terminates at the accession of 
the third Gordian, a.d. 238. ZOSIMUS {Historia no'va libri sex ; ed. Bekker, 
in the Corpus Hist. Byz. Bonnse, 1837); and ZoNARAS {Annales ; ed. Pinder, 
in the same series, Bonnae, 1841), are also occasionally serviceable. From 
A.D. 226 the history of Agathias (ed. Niebuhr. Bonn, 1828) is of import- 
ance. To these various authors may be added the Fragments of Dexippus, 
whereof there are several collections. The best, probably, is that in the Frag- 
menta Htstoricorum Groecorum of G, MiiLLER (Paris, 1 841-9; vol. iii. pp. 666- 
687). (2) Coins and medals, valuable for the preceding period, are still more 
useful for this. Works illustrating the History of the Empire from them have 
been written by 

Foy-Vaillant, J., {Numismata Augustorum et Casarum. Rome, 1743 ; 3 vols, 
folio), and 

GOOKE, W., (The Medallic History of Imperial Rome. London, 1781 ; 2 vols.) 

For representations of the coins, see vol. vii. of the great work of Eckhel 
(Doctrina Nummorum Veterum. Vindobonse, 1792 ; 8 vols. 4to.) ; and compare 
MiONNET, Description des Medailles. Paris, 1806-37; 18 vols. i2mo.) 

The great modern work on the period is the celebi'ated History of the Decline 
atid Fall of the Roman Empire, by EDWARD GiBBON, of which the best edition 
is that of Dr. W. Smith. London, 1854; 8 vols, 8vo. This work, though 
less accurate and trustworthy than it was formerly thought to be, is still the 
best on the subject whereof it treats. The sensible reader will make allowance 
for the unfairness and bias natural in a professed sceptic. 

Among other works which, like that of Gibbon, while they embrace the 
period, go considerably beyond it, may be mentioned 

Montesquieu, Considerations sur les causes de la grandeur des Romains et de 
leur decadence, in his CEwvres completes. Paris, 1718 ; 5 vols. 8vo. And 

SiSMONDl, Histoire de la chute de P Empire Romain et du declin de la civilisation. 
Paris, 1835 ; 2 vols. 8vo, 

I. The special characteristic of the period on which we now 
enter is military tyranny — the usurpation of supreme power by the 
soldiers, who had at last discovered their strength. General 
and nominated or removed Emperors at their plea- character of the 
sure. Constant disquiet and disturbance was the Pertinax to 
result of this unhappy discovery — twenty-five Em- Kocletian. 
perors wore the purple in the space of ninety-two years, their 
reigns thus averaging less than four years apiece. Two reigns 
only during the entire period — those of the two Severi — exceeded 
ten years. Deducting these, the average for a reign is reduced to 
two years ! It was of course impossible under these circumstances 
that any renovation of the Empire or restoration of pristine vigour 
should be effected. The internal administration was indeed scarcely 
a subject of attention. Each Emperor was fully occupied by the 
necessity of maintaining his own power against rival pretenders, 
generally with as good claims as his own^ and resisting the attacks 
of the barbarians, who were continually increasing in strength and 
audacity. The few good princes who held the throne exerted them- 
selves mainly to strengthen and invigorate the army by the re- 
establishment and strict enforcement of discipline. Reform in 



502 ROME. [book v. 

this quarter was sadly needed- but to accomplish it was most 
difficult. A strict Emperor usually fell a victim to his reforming 
zeal, which rapidly alienated the aflFections of the soldiers. 

3. The assassins of Commodus, having effected their purpose, 
acted with decision and promptness. Lsetus and Eclectus pro- 
ceeded to the house of Pertinax, prefect of the city, 
Pertinax, revealed their deed_, and offered him the crown. With 
Jan. I to Mar. 2 8, ^ reluctance which may well have been unfeigned, 

A.D. 193. . ^ fc> 3 

this aged senator, a man of experience in business, 
and of unblemished character, one of the few remaining friends of 
M. Aurelius, signified his consent. Influenced by Laetus, the Prse- 
torians consented somewhat sullenly to accept him ; the Senate, 
surprised and overjoyed, hailed the new reign with acclamations. 
But the difficulties of Pertinax began when his authority was ac- 
knowledged. An empty treasury required economy and retrench- 
ment, while a greedy soldiery and a demoralised people clamoured 
for shows and for a donative. The donative, which had been pro- 
mised, was paid ; but this necessitated a still stricter curtailment 
of other expenses. The courtiers and the citizens grumbled at 
a frugality to which they were unaccustomed ; the soldiers dreaded 
lest a virtuous prince should enforce on them the restraints of dis- 
cipline • the ' king-maker," Lastus, was disappointed that the ruler 
whom he had set up would not consent to be a mere puppet. 
Within three months of his acceptance of power, Pertinax found 
himself almost without a friend ; and when the Prsetorians, insti- 
gated by Lietus, broke out in open mutiny, he unresistingly suc- 
cumbed, and was despatched by their swords. 

The only special source for the history of Pertinax is his Life by Jul. Capi- 
TOLINUS in the Hist. August. Scriptores. 

3. The Praetorians, who had murdered Pertinax, are said to have 

set up the office of Emperor to public auction, and to have sold it 

to M. Didius Julianus, a rich senator, once governor 

Reign of r ^-^ 1 • 1 1 

Didius Julianus, Or Ualmatia, whose elevation cost him more than 
^^A^D 193^^^'^^^^^ millions of our money. Julianus was acknow- 
ledged by the Senate, and reigned at Rome for rather 
more than two months j but his authority was never established 
over the provinces. In three different quarters — in Britain, in 
Pannonia, and in Syria — the legions, on learning the death of Per- 
tinax and the scandalous circumstances of Julianus' appointment, 
invested their leaders, Albinus, Severus, and Niger, with the purple, 



PART I. PEK. VI.] REIGN OF SEPT. SEVERUS. 503 

and declared against the choice of the Praetorians, Of the three 
pretenders, Severus was at once the most energetic and the nearest 
Rome. Taking advantage of his position, he rapidly led his army 
across the Alps, advanced through Italy upon the capital, seduced 
the Prsetorians by his emissaries, and was accepted by the Senate 
as Emperor. The luckless Julianus was deposed, condemned to 
death, and executed. 

The Life of Didius Julianus, by ^Lius Spartianus, in the Hist. August. 
Scriptores, is the chief source for his history. 

4. The first act of Severus on obtaining the Empire was to 
disarm and disband the existing Praetorians, who were forbidden 
to reside thenceforth within a hundred miles of the j^^igj^ of 
capital. He then addressed himself to the contest Septimius 

Severus, 

With his rivals. First temporising with Albinus, the a.d. 

commander in Britain, whom he promised to make i93-2ii. 
his successor, he led his whole force against the eastern Emperor, 
Pescennius Niger, defeated his troops in two great battles, at 
Cyzicus and Issus, captured him, and put him to death. He then 
declared openly against Albinus, who advanced into Gaul and tried 
the fortune of war in an engagement near Lyons, where he too 
suffered defeat and was slain. Severus was now master of the 
whole Empire, and might safely have shown mercy to the partisans 
of his rivals, against whom he had no just grounds of complaint. 
But he was of a stern and cruel temper. Forty-one senators and 
great numbers of the rich provincials were executed for the crime 
of opposing him • and his government was established on a more 
tyrannical footing than any former Emperor had 

, ,_, _, 1 • 1 r J.1 Advance of the 

ventured on. The Senate was deprived of even the government 
show of power, and openly oppressed and insulted. towards 

^ •' r y rr despotism. 

The Empire became a complete military despotism. 
In lieu of the old Prsetorians, a body of 40,000 troops, selected 
from the legionaries, formed the garrison of Rome, and acted as 
the Emperor's body-guard. Their chief, the Prsetorian Prefect 
{Frafectus pr^torio)., became the second person in the kingdom, 
and a dangerous rival to the sovereign. Not only the command 
of the guards, but legislative and judicial power, and especially 
the control of the finances, were entrusted to him. Severus at- 
tempted, but without much effect, to improve the general disci- 
pline of the legionaries ; he also showed himself an active and 
good commander. His expedition against the Parthians (a.d. 



504 ROME. [book v. 

197-8) was^ on the whole, remarkably prosperous, the Parthian 
capital, Ctesiphon, falling into his hands, and Adiabene being 
made a dependency. In Britain his arms had no such decisive 
success; but still he chastised the Caledonians, a.d. 308-9, and 
extended the limits of the Empire in this quarter. His later years 
were saddened by the unconcealed enmity of his two sons, who 
were scarcely restrained, by their common dependence upon their 
father, from an open and deadly quarrel. Determined that neither 
should be left at the mercy of the other, he associated both in the 
Empire, and recommended both to the army as his successors. He 
died at York, a.d. 311, at the age of sixty-five, having reigned 
eighteen years. 

The 'Augustan History' contains, besides the Life of Severus by Spar- 
TIANUS, Limes of Pescennius Niger and Clodius Albinus, the former by Sparti- 
ANUS, the latter by Jul. Capitolinus. 

5. The two sons of Severus, Caracallus (wrongly called Cara- 
calla) and Geta, reigned conjointly for the space of a single year, 

mutually hating and suspecting one another. At 

Caracallus, the end of that time, after a fruitless attempt had 

9n 917 been made to settle their quarrel by a division of 

the Empire, Caracallus, under pretence of a recon- 
ciliation, met his brother Geta in the apartments of the Empress- 
mother, Julia Domna, and there had him murdered in her arms 
(Feb. A.D. 312). After this he reigned for five years alone, showing 
himself a most execrable tyrant. Twenty thousand persons were 
put to death under the vague title of ' friends of Geta ;' among 
them a daughter of M. Aurelius, a son of Pertinax, a nephew of 
Commodus, and the great jurist Papinian. Caracallus then, made 
restless by his guilty conscience, quitted Rome never to return, 
and commenced a series of aimless wanderings through the pro- 
vinces. He visited Gaul, Rhaetia, Dacia, Thrace, Asia Minor, 
Syria, Egypt, and Mesopotamia, everywhere marking his track 
with blood, and grievously oppressing the provincials. Knowing 
himself to be generally hated, he endeavoured to secure the affec- 
tions of the soldiers by combining excessive rewards for service 
with very remiss discipline, thus doubly injuring the Empire. The 
vigour of the army melted away under his lax rule j and the re- 
sources of the State were exhausted by his ruinous profuseness, 
which led him to devise new and ingenious modes of increasing 
taxation. It may have been also his desire to gratify his army 



PART I. PER. VI.] CARACALLUS AND MACRINUS. 505 

which induced him to plunge into his great war. In the west he 
had engaged in no hostilities of importance, having merely when 
in Gaul made an insignificant expedition against the Alemanni, 
A.D. 314 j but after he had transferred his residence to the east, 
he determined on an attempt to conquer Parthia. Fixing his head- 
quarters at Edessa in Mesopotamia, he proceeded to tread in his 
father's footsteps, crossed the Tigris, took Arbela, and drove the 
Parthians to seek refuge in the mountains, a.d. 316. Another 
campaign would have followed; but, before it could begin, Cara- 
callus was murdered by the Prsetorian prefect Macrinus, who knew 
his own life to be in danger, 

In order to extend the incidence of the 'succession-tax' (jvicesima_ hceredi- 
tattuni), Caracallus suddenly conferred the rights of citizenship on the whole 
Roman world. At the same time, he increased the tax from five per cent, 
to ten. 

The Lives of Caracallus and Geta, by ^lius Spartianus, contained in the 
Hist. August. Scriptores, form the chief special source for the history of these 
princes. 

6. Macrinus, proclaimed Emperor after some hesitation by the 
soldiers, and acknowledged by the Senate, began his reign by 
attempts to undo the evil policy of Caracallus, the 
ruinous effects of which Were manifest. He with- Macrinus, 
drew at once from the Parthian war, which threat- ^•'°- 

■ ■ 217-218. 

ened to be tedious and expensive, consenting to 
purchase peace of the enemy. Not venturing to interfere with the 
rewards of the existing soldiery, he enlisted recruits upon lower 
terms. He diminished the burthens of the citizens by restoring 
the ^succession-tax' to its old rate of five per cent. These pro- 
ceedings were no doubt salutary, and popular with the mass of his 
subjects ; but they were disagreeable to the army, and the army 
was now the real depository of supreme power. Hence Macrinus, 
like Pertinax, soon fell a victim to his reforming zeal. The dis- 
affection of the soldiers was artfully fomented by Maesa, sister of 
Julia Domna, the late Empress, who induced them to raise to the 
throne her grandson Avitus^ or Bassianus^ then high-priest of Ela- 
gabalus, in the great temple at Emesa (Hems), whom she declared 
to be a son of Caracallus. Macrinus did not yield without a 
struggle ; but^ quitting the field while the battle was still doubtful, 
he ruined his own cause by his cowardice. Pursued by the soldiers 
of his rival, he was captured at Chalcedon, brought back to An- 



5o6 ROME. [BOOK v. 

tioch, and put to death. His son, Diadumenus, on whom he had 
conferred the title of Caesar, shared his fate. 

Two Lives in the Bist. August. Scriptores bear upon this reign— that of 
Macrinus by Capitolinus, and that of Diadumenus by Lampridius. 

7. Avitus, or Bassianus, on his accession to the throne took the 
name of M. Aurelius Antoninus, and assumed as an undoubted 

Reign of ^^^^ ^^^ descent from Severus and Caracallus. The 
the monster name of ' Eiagabalus,' by which he is generally 

Elagabahis, , , , r 1 1 • ir 

A.D. known, was perhaps also used by himself occasion- 

218-222. a^iiy^ though it is not found upon his coins. His 
reign, which lasted four years only, is, though not the most bloody, 
yet beyond a doubt the most disgraceful and disgusting in the 
Roman annals. Elagabalus was the most eflFeminate and dissolute 
of mortals. He openly paraded his addiction to the lowest form 
of sensual vice. The contemptible companions of his guilty plea- 
sures were advanced by him to the most important offices of the 
State. Syrian orgies replaced the grave ^nd decent ceremonies of 
the Roman religion. A vestal virgin, torn from her sacred seclu- 
sion, was forced to be one of his wives. It is astonishing that the 
Romans, degenerate as they were, could endure for nearly four 
years the rule of a foreign boy, who possessed no talent of any 
kind, and whose whole life was passed in feasting, rioting, and the 
most infamous species of debauchery. Yet we do not find that his 
gross vices provoked any popular outburst. It was not till he 
threatened the life of his cousin, Alexander Severus, whom he had 
been prevailed upon to make ^ Cse'sar,' that opposition to his rule 
appeared, and then it came from the Prsetorians. These ^ king- 
makers ' had, it seems, conceived a certain disgust of the effemi- 
nate monarch, who painted his face and wore the attire of a 
woman ; and they had become attached to the virtuous Alexander. 
When, therefore, they found that of the two one must be sacrificed, 
they mutinied, slew Elagabalus, and placed his cousin upon the 
throne. 

Consult ^L. Lampridii, Fit. Antonin. Heliogabali, in the Hist. August. 
Scriptores. 

8. In Alexander Severus, who succeeded his cousin, a.d. 233, 
we come upon an Emperor of a different type. Carefully educated 

by his mother, Mammsea, the younger daughter of 

Alexander Msesa, he presents the remarkable spectacle of a 

Severus, prince of pure and blameless morals cast upon a 

. 222-235. corrupt age, striving, so far as his powers went, to 



PAKT I. PER. VI.] REIGN OF ALEX. SEVERUS. 507 

reform the degenerate State^ and falling at length a victim to his 
praiseworthy but somewhat feeble efforts. It is perhaps doubtful 
whether at this time any degree of ability could have checked 
effectually the downward progress of the Empire, and arrested the 
decay that was leading on to absolute ruin. But Alexander, at 
any rate, did not possess such ability — like his cousin, he was a 
Syrian, and the taint of weakness was in his blood. However 
well-intentioned we may consider him to have been, there can be 
no doubt that he was deficient in vigour of mind^ in self-assertion, 
and in the powers generally which make the firm and good sove- 
reign. He allowed his mother to rule him throughout his whole 
reign. He shrank from grappling with the mutinous spirit of the 
army, and from those stern and bold measures which could alone 
have quelled insubordination. Hence his reign, though its ten- 
dency was towards good, failed permanently to benefit the Empire, 
and can only be regarded as a lull in the storm, a deceitful calm, 
ushering in a more furious burst of the tempest. It was in vain 
that Alexander by his simple life set a pattern of frugality ; that, 
by re-establishing the Council of State, he sought to impose limits 
on his own power ; that by deference to the Senate he endeavoured 
to raise it in public esteem, and to infuse into it a feeling of 
self-respect ; that by his intimacy with learned and literary men, 
he aimed at elevating the gown above the sword. He had not the 
strength of character to leave his mark upon the world. His 
attempts at reform failed or died with him. Military licence 
asserted itself the more determinedly for his efforts to repress it, 
forcing Dio into retirement, and taking the life of Ulpian. Con- 
stant mutinies disgraced his reign, and at length, in the German 
war, the soldiers, despising his military incapacity, drew their 
swords against the Emperor himself, and murdered him, together 
with his mother. 

"Wars of this Reign, (i) Persian War. The great revolution, a.d. 226, 
by which the Parthian kingdom was brought to an end, and the New Persian 
Monarchy established in its room (see below, p. 567), led rapidly to hostilities 
between Rome and her eastern neighbour. Artaxerxes demanded the restora- 
tion to Persia of all her ancient provinces. Alexander Severus met the demand 
with an invasion, a.d. 231. His troops advanced in three lines, along the 
Tigris, the Euphrates, and the intermediate region, but were met and checked 
by the Persians. The war lasted two years. Alexander pretended to have 
gained a great victory, but appears to have barely held his own. Peace seems 
to have been made, but on what terms is uncertain, A.D. 233. (2) German 
War. From the Tigris Alexander passed to the Rhine, a.d. 234, where the 
German tribes had taken the aggressive, and were plundering Gaul. He 



5o8 ROME. [BOOK v, 

stationed himself at Mogontiacum (Mainz), and was killed there early in 
A.D. 235. 

The Life of Alex. Severus, in the Hist. August. Scriptores, by Lampridius, is 
one of the worst of the series, being almost pure panegyric. Herodian is the 
best authority for his reign. A good estimate of his character will be found in 
the work of Heyne, De Alexandra Se'Vero Judieium ; in vol. vi. of his Opuscula 
Academica. 

9. The mutinous soldiers who murdered Severus had acted at 

the instigation of an officer named Maximin, and this man they 

at once proclaimed Emperor. He was by birth a 

Maximin, Thracian peasant, and, though he must have shown 

^•°- considerable ability to have obtained the command 

235—238. 

of a legion, yet he still remained rude and coarse, 

fierce and brutal, more than half a savage. The cruelties of 

Maximin, directed against all the noble and wealthy, and still more 

his constant extortions, soon made him generally detested j and 

the tyranny of one of his creatures in ' Africa' produced a revolt 

, , against him in his fourth year — a.d. 2^8. The 
Rebellion of the => , ^ , . ^ ' , , ^ , . 

two Gordians, people of the provmce rose up, and made Gordian, 

and their death. |-]^gjj. proconsul, together with his son. Emperors. 
With a boldness that nothing but utter despair could have 
prompted, the Senate ratified their choice. Hearing this, Maxi- 
min, who was in winter quarters at Sirmium on the Danubian 
frontier, immediately commenced his march towards Italy, hoping 
to crush his enemies by his promptness. His original rivals, the 
first and second Gordian, gave him no trouble, being put down by 
Capellianus, governor of Mauret'ania, little more than a month 
after their rebellion. But the Senate, with unwonted energy, sup- 
^ „ . , plied their place by two of their own body, Pupienus 

Balbmus and '^ ^ ' iiirrri 

Pupienus and Balbinus, and undertook the defence of Italy 
Emperors, against Maximin. They garrisoned the towns, laid 
waste the country, and prepared to weary out the army which they 
could not venture to meet. The plan succeeded. Maximin, 
stopped by the resistance of Aquileia, and growing daily more 
savage on account of his want of success, became hateful to his 
own soldiers, who rose up against him, and slew him, with his son, 
in his tent. Maximin was killed, probably^ in the early part of 
May, A.D. 238. 

But little is known of the wars of this reign, which seem, however, to have 
been important. Maximin, after the death of Severus, remained for nearly 
two years (a.d. 235-6) on the Rhenish frontier, employed in chastising the 
Germans. He then removed his head-quarters to Sirmium on the Save, 



PART I. PER. VI.] MAXIMIN TO PHILIP. 509 

and engaged in a war with the Sannatians on the borders of Dacia, a.d. 237. 
From this war he was called off by the news of the Senate's defection. 

The ' Augustan History' contains Li'ves of Maximin, of the Gordians, and of 
Pupienus and Balbinus, by Jul. Capitolinus. 

10. The triumph of the Senate, which seemed assured by the 
murder of Maximin, was regarded by the soldiers as fatal to their 
pretensions ; and they soon came to a resolution 
that the Senatorian Emperors should not remain at Balbinus and 
the head of affairs. Already, before the death of P^pie"^^- 
Maximin, they had asserted their right to have a voice in the 
nomination of the supreme authority, and had forced Balbinus and 
Pupienus to accept at their bidding a third Gordian, grandson and 
nephew of the former princes of the name, as Caesar. On the 
downfal of Maximin, and the full establishment of Pupienus and 
Balbinus as Emperors, they thought it necessary for their interests 
to advance a step further. The Senate's nominees were not to be 
tolerated on any terms; and within six weeks of their triumph 
over Maximin the Praetorians murdered them, and made the third 
Gordian sole Emperor. 

J I . This unfortunate youth, who at the age of thirteen was 
elevated to the position of supreme ruler over the entire Roman 
world, continued to occupy the throne for the space 
of six years, a.d. 238 to 344, but cannot be said to third Gordian 
have exercised any real authority over the Empire. ^•°- 

■^ •' ^ 238-244. 

At first, he was the mere tool of the eunuchs of the 
palace ; after which he fell under the influence of Timesicles, or 
Timesitheus, whose daughter he married, and who held the office 
of Praetorian Prefect. Timesitheus was an able minister; and 
the reign of Gordian was not unprosperous. He maintained the 
Roman frontier intact against the attacks of the Persians, a.d. 242, 
and suppressed an insurrection in Africa, a.d. 240. On his return 
from the Persian war he was murdered near Circesium by Philip 
' the Arabian,' who had succeeded Timesitheus in the command of 
the guard. 

Capitolinus' Life is the chief authority for this reign (see the Hist. August. 
Scriptores'). ZosiMUS (book i.) is also serviceable, 

12. M. Julius Philippus, of Bostra in Arabia (probably a Roman 

colonist), who was made Emperor by the soldiers after they had 

killed the young Gordian, had a reign of five years only. Reign of Philip, 

from A.D. 244 to 249. He concluded a peace with the ^■'^- 244-249. 

Persians on tolerable terms, a.d. 244, celebrated the senelar games 



5 to . ROME. [book V. 

in commemoration of the thousandth year from the founding of 
the city, a.d. 248, and defeated the Carpi on the middle Danube, 
A.D. 245. The notices which we possess of his reign are brief and 
confused, but sufficiently indicate the growing disorganisation of 
the Empire. Discontented with their governor, Priscus, Philip's 
brother, the Syrians revolted, and set up a rival Emperor, named 
Jotapianus. About the same time, the troops in Mcesia and Pan- 
nonia, from hatred of their officers, mutinied and invested with 
the purple a certain Marinus. These two mock Emperors lost 
their lives shortly; but the Moesian and Pannonian legions con- 
tinuing disaffected, Philip sent a senator named Decius to bring 
them under. The rebels, however, placed Decius at their head, 
marched on Italy, and defeated and slew Philip at Verona, 
September, a.d. 349. 

The statement of the ecclesiastical historians, that Philip was a Christian, is 
not altogether unworthy of belief. (See Niebuhr, Lectures of Roman History, 
vol. iii. Lecture 126.) Origen certainly addressed a letter to him. 

13. Decius, made Emperor against his will by the Moesian and 
Pannonian legions, was gladly accepted by the Senate, which was 

pleased to see the throne again occupied by x)ne of its 

Decius! o"w^ii number. His short reign of two years only is 

^■'°- chiefly remarkable for the first appearance of a new 

249—251. 

and formidable enemy — the Goths — who invaded the 
Empire in vast force, a.d. 250, traversed Dacia, crossed the Danube, 
spread devastation over Moesia, and even passed the Balkan and 
burst into Thrace. Decius, unsuccessful in a.d. 350, endeavoured 
in the following year to retrieve his ill fortune, by destroying the 
Gothic host on its retreat. He was defeated, however, in a great 
battle near Forum Trebonii, in Mcesia^ and, together with his eldest 
son, whom he had associated in the Empire, lost his life.. 

14. Under these unhappy circumstances, the Senate was allowed 
to regulate the succession to the Empire; which was determined 

in favour of Gallus, one of the generals of Decius, 

Gallus! and of Decius' young son, Hostilianus. Volusianus, 

^^t^^,^ the son of Gallus, was also associated in the impe- 

251-253. ' ^ 

rial dignity. The real authority rested, however, 
with Gallus, whose age and experience placed him far above his 
colleagues. He commenced his reign by purchasing a peace from 
the Goths, to whom he consented to pay an annual tribute, on 
condition of their respecting the Roman frontier, a.d. 353. He 



PART I. PEE. VI.] DECIUS TO VALERIAN. 511 

then returned to Rome, where he rapidly became unpopular, partly 
because of the disgraceful peace which he had made, partly on 
account of his inertness amid the fresh calamities which afflicted 
the unhappy State. Pestilence raged in Rome, and over most of 
the Empire ; while fresh hordes of barbarians, incited by the suc- 
cess of the Goths, poured across the Danube, ^milianus, governor 
of Pannonia and Moesia, having met and defeated these marauders, 
was proclaimed Emperor by his army, and, marching upon Rome, 
easily established his authority. Gallus and his son (Hostilian had 
died of the plague) led out an army against him, but were slain by 
their own soldiers at Interamna on the Nar, near Spoletium. 
i^milian was then acknowledged by the Senate. 

15. The destruction of Gallus and Volusianus was soon avenged. 
Licinius Valerianus, a Roman of unblemished character, whom 
Decius had wished to invest with the office of ^ . . 

Reign of 

Censor, and whom Gallus had sent to bring to ^milian, 
his aid the legions of Gaul and Germany, arrived ^' " 
in Italy soon after the accession of Tamilian, and resolved to dis- 
pute his title to the crown. The opposing armies once more 
met near Spoletium, and, by a just retribution, 7E,milian suffered 
the fate of his predecessors, three months after he had ascended 
the throne. 

16. The calamities of the Empire went on continually increasing. 
On the Lower Rhine there had been formed a confederacy of several 
German tribes, the Chauci, Cherusci, Chatti, and j, . . 
others, which, under the name of Franks (i. e. Free- Valerian, 
men), became one of Rome's most formidable ene- 253-26O. 
mies. South of these, the Alemanni, in the tract Calamities of 
between the Lahn and Switzerland, had broken the Empire, 
through the Roman rampart, absorbed the Agri Decumates, to- 
gether with a portion of Vindelicia, and assumed from this 
position an aggressive attitude, threatening not only Gaul but 
Rhsetia, and even Italy. On the Lower Danube and on the shores 
of the Euxine, the Goths, who had now taken to the sea, me- 
naced with their numerous fleets Thrace, Pontus, Asia Minor, 
Macedonia, and Greece. Finally, in the remote East, Persia, 
under its new monarchs, the Sassanidae, was growing in strength, 
and extending itself at the expense of Rome towards the north- 
west. Valerian, already sixty years of age at his accession, felt 
his inability to grapple with these various dangers, and associatedj 



§12 ROME. [book V. 

in his second year, a.d. 254, his son Gallienus in the Empire. 

But the young prince was no more equal to the occasion than his 

aged father. The entire joint reign of Valerian and his son 

(a.d. 254 to 260)5 as well as the succeeding sole reign 

Gallfenus of the latter (a.d. 360 to 368), was one uninterrupted 

^•°- series of disorders and disasters. The Franks harried 

260-268. 

Gaul and Spain at their will, and even passed into 
Africa. The Alemanni crossed the Rhsetian Alps, invaded Italy, 
and advanced as far on the way to Rome as Ravenna. The Goths 
occupied Dacia j and, issuing with their fleets from the Cimmerian 
Bosphorus, ravaged Northern and Western Asia Minor, destroyed 
Pityus, Trebizond, Chalcedon, Nicomedia, Nicasa, Prusa, Cius, 
Cyzicus, and Ephesus, overran Greece, took Athens and Corinth, 
and carried ofF an immense booty into the regions beyond the 
Danube. The Persians, under Sapor, conquered Armenia, invaded 
Mesopotamia, defeated Valerian and took him prisoner near Edessa, 
advanced into Syria, surprised and burnt Antioch, took Tarsus and 
Csesarea Mazaca, and returned triumphant into their own country. 
At the same time, and in consequence of the general disorgani- 
sation which these various invasions produced, numerous inde- 
pendent sovereigns started up in different parts of the Roman 
Time of Empire, as Odenathus in the East, who reigned at 
the ' Thirty Palmyra over Syria and the adjacent countries, Post- 
yran s. hunius and Victorinus in Gaul, Celsus in Africa, 
Ingenuus and Aureolus in Illyria, Macrianus in Asia Minor, Piso 
in Thessaly, ^Emilianus in Egypt, Sec. These sovereigns — known 
as the ' Thirty Tyrants' — had for the most part brief and inglo- 
rious reigns; and their kingdoms were generally as short-lived as 
themselves. In two quarters, however, a tendency to a permanent 
splitting up of the Empire was exhibited. The kingdom of Ode- 
nathus passed from that prince to his widow, Zenobia, and lasted 
for ten years — ^from a.d. 264 to 273. The Gallic monarchy of 
Posthumus showed still greater vitality, continuing for seventeen 
jears, under four successive princes, Posthumus, Victorinus, Ma- 
rius, and Tetricus. Gallienus, quite incapable of grappling with 
the terrible difficulties of the time, aimed at little more than 
maintaining his authority in Italy. Even there, however, he was 
attacked by Aureolus ; and in the war which followed, his own 
soldiers slew him as he lay before Milan, into which Aureolus had 
thrown himself, a.d. 268. 



PART I. PER. VI.] GALLIENUS TO AURELIAN. 513 

The chief authority for this troublous period is Trebellius Pollio, whose 
Lmes of Valerian, Gallienus, and the 'Thirty Tyrants' are contained in the 
' Augustan History.' Aurelius Victor, Zosimus, and Zonaras must also 
be consulted. For the Gothic wars the best authority is Jornandes, De Ge- 
tarum sive Gothorum origine et rebus gestis. Hamburg, 1611 ; 4to. For the 
history of the ' Thirty Tyrants,' the student may consult with advantage 
Manso's Dissertation at the end of his Leben Constantins des Grossen. Breslau, 
1817 ; 8vo. 

17. From the state of extreme weakness and disorganisation 

which Rome had now reached, a state which seemed to portend 

her almost immediate dissolution, she was raised by Partial 

a succession of able Emperors, who, although their recovery of the 

, • 1 1 . . • \ ±. J. Roman Empire, 

reigns were unhappily short, contrived at once to ^ 

reunite the fragments into which the Empire had begun to split, 

and to maintain for the most part the integrity of the frontiers 

against the barbarians. Claudius, Aurelian, Tacitus, Probus, and 

Carus — five warlike princes — reigned from a.d. 368 to 283, and in 

this space of fifteen years^ the progress that was made towards 

a recovery of the power and prestige of Rome is most remarkable. 

M. Aurelius Claudius^ the successor of Gallienus, 

who reigned from a.d. 368 to 270, gained a great cia^ius, 

victory over the Alemanni in Northern Italy in ^•°- 

^ ' 268-270. 

A.D. 368, and another over the Goths at Nissa in 
Moesia, a.d. 369. His successor, L. Domitius Aurelianus, routed 
an army of Goths in Pannonia^ a.d. 270, and effec- 
tually checked the Alemanni in North Italy. Bent Amliian, 
on reuniting the fragments of the Empire, he under- ■*"°- 

^ . ° r 5 270-275. 

took a war against Zenobia, a.d. 272, and brought 
it to a happy conclusion the year after. He then turned his arms 
against the great Western kingdom of Gaul, Spain, and Britain, 
which was held by Tetricus, and succeeded in re-establishing the 
authority of Rome over those regions, a.d. 274. He was about to 
proceed against the Persians, a.d. 275, when he fell a victim to 
the malice of his private secretary, Eros (or Mnestheus), whose 
misconduct he had threatened to punish. 

The ' Augustan History' contains a Life of Claudius by Trebellius Pollio, 
and one of Aurelian by Flavius Vopiscus. 

The splendour of its ruins and the romantic story of its queen Zenobia, 
have attached a special interest to Palmyra and its brief life as an independent 
kingdom. Odenathus, the founder, first distinguished himself by raising an 
army against Sapor, when that prince had defeated Valerian, and inflicting 
losses upon him during his retreat. He was acknowledged as a sort of col- 
league to Gallienus, a.d. 264. Murdered by his nephew, Mseonius, a.d. 267, 
he was succeeded by his widow, Zenobia, who avenged him by putting Maeo- 
nius to death, and ruled from a.d. 267 to 273, as regent for her son Vaba- 

Ll 



514 ROME. [book v. 

lathus. In the reign of Claudius she made an attempt to conquer Egypt, 
which was unsuccessful, a.d. 269. Aurelian attacked her, a.d. 272, defeated 
her in two great battles, near Antioch and Emesa (Hems), pursued her to 
Palmyra, and (a.d. 273) forced her to surrender. The city was mildly treated 
at first, but, revolting as soon as Aurelian had returned to Europe, was de- 
stroyed. Zenobia, transferred to Italy, became a Roman matron. 

On the architectural glories of Palmyra the student may consult the fol- 
lowing works : — - 

Wood, R., The Ruins of Palmyra. London, 1753 ; folio. A magnificent work 
for the time at which it was published. Not superseded by any later one. 

Addison, C. G., Damascus and Palmyra. London, 1838; 2 vols. 8vo. 

18. The military glories of Aurelian's reign have thrown into 
some obscurity his prudential measures ; yet to these Rome prob- 

He abandons ^^^^ owed as much. He finally relinquished to the 
Dacia and Goths and Vandals the outlying province of Dacia, 

fortifies Rome. 1 ■ 1 1 j j r .1 -• r -^ ^• 

which had proved from the time of its occupation 
by Trajan nothing but an incumbrance to the Empire. The 
Roman inhabitants were removed across the Danube into Moesia, 
a part of which was henceforth known as ' Dacia Aureliani.' Au- 
relian also fortified the capital anew, thus securing it from a coup 
de mam^ which the incursions of the Alemanni had shown to be 
a real danger. His walls, which were restored by Honorius, con- 
tinue, with some small exceptions, to be those of the modern city. 

On the walls of Aurelian, see Becker, De Romcs 'ceteris muris atque portis. 
Lipsise, 1842; 8vo. ; and Bunsen, Beschreibung der Stadt Rom. (See above, 
p. 348.) 

19. The assassination of Aurelian was displeasing to the army 
which he commanded ; and the soldiers, instead of allowing any 

of their officers to agsume the purple, applied to the 

Tacitus, Senate to appoint a new Emperor. The Senate 

^•^- hesitated : but, after an interval of six months, 

275-276. ' ' ' 

complied with the request, and elected M. Claudius 

Tacitus, one of their body. A pleasing dream was entertained for 

a few weeks of restoring something like the old republic ; but the 

illusion soon vanished. Tacitus was called away from Rome by 

an irruption of the Alani into Asia Minor, and there perished, 

six or seven months after his accession, either from weakness or 

through military violence. 

The Life of Tacitus, by VOPISCUS, in the Hist. August. Scriptores, is the 
special authority for this reign. 

20. On learning the death of Tacitus, Florian, his brother, 
assumed the imperial dignity at Rome, while the army of the 

Reigns of East raised to the purple their general, M. Aure- 
Jd 276 ^^^^ Probus. A bloody contest for the Empire 



PART I. PER. VI.] AURELIAN TO CARUS. 515 

seemed impending ; but it was prevented by the and Probus, 
lukewarmness of Florian-'s soldiers in his cause. '^•°- 276-282. 
Sacrificing their leader, who survived his brother little more 
than three months, they passed over to his rival, who thus 
became undisputed Emperor. Probus was a warlike, and at the 
same time a careful and prudent prince, anxious to benefit his 
subjects, not merely by military expeditions, but by the arts of 
peace. He delivered Gaul from the German hordes which infested 
it, and carried the Roman arms once more beyond the Rhine to 
the banks of the Neckar and the Elbe. The 'Agri Decumates' 
became again a portion of the Empire, and the rampart of Hadrian 
was restored and strengthened. On the Danube Probus chastised 
the Sarmatians, and by the mere terror of his arms induced the 
Goths to sue for peace. In Asia Minor he recovered Isauria, 
which had fallen into the hands of robbers. In Africa he pacified 
Egypt. The court of Persia sought his alliance. The troubles 
raised by the pretenders, Saturninus in the East, and Proculus and 
Bonosus in the West^ he suppressed without any difficulty. Among 
his plans for recruiting the strength of the Empire two are specially 
noticeable — (i) the settlement in most of the frontier provinces of 
large bodies of captured or fugitive barbarians, Franks, Vandals, 
Bastarnae, GepidaSj &c., and (2) the improvement of agriculture 
by the drainage of marshy tracts and the planting of suitable 
localities with the grape. The first of these plans was attended 
with a good deal of success ; the second unfortunately provoked 
an outbreak which cost Probus his life. He had ventured to 
employ his soldiers in agricultural labours^ which were distasteful 
to them, and perhaps injurious to their health. On this account 
they mutinied, seized their arms, and, in a moment of passion, 
stained their hands with his blood. Probus died, a.d. 282, after a 
reign of six years and six months. 

The 'Augustan History' contains L'^ves of Florian, Probus, Saturninus, Pro- 
culus, and Bonosus, all written by Flavius Vopiscus, who flourished under 
Diocletian and Constantine. 

21. After murdering Probus, the soldiers conferred the purple on 
M. Aurelius Carus, Prefect of the Prsetorians, who joint reign 
proclaimed his two sons, Carinus and Numerianus, of Carus 

^ .',, ^ ■ ■ 1 ^"*i Cannus, 

'Csesars, and associated the elder, Carmus, in the a.d. 

cares of Empire. Leaving this prince to conduct 282-283. 

affairs in the West, Carus proceeded at the head of a large 

L 1 2 



5i6 ROME. [BOOK V. 

army to Illyricum, where he inflicted a severe defeat on the 
Sarmatians, killing 16,000, and taking 30,000 prisoners, after 
which he proceeded to Persia, where he carried all before him, 
overrunning Mesopotamia, and taking Seleucia and Ctesiphon. 
The complete conquest of Persia was anticipated ; but the sudden 
death of the Emperor — whom different authors report to have been 
murdered, to have died of disease, and to have been killed by 
lightning — put a stop to the expedition, and saved the kingdom of 
the Sassanidse. Carus died, a.d. 283, after he had reigned a little 
more than a year. On his death, his son Numerian was acknow- 
ledged as Emperor. 

22. The year following, a.d. 284, saw the death of Numerian, 
who was murdered at Perinthus by his father-in-law, the Prsetorian 

Prefect, Arrius Aper. Carinus still ruled in the 

Nun^ian, West j but the army of the East, discovering the 

^•°- death of Numerian, which was concealed, set up 

283-284. ^ ' ^ 

a rival Emperor in the person of Diocletian, who 
slew Aper with his own hand, and marching westward, defeated 
Carinus, who was then assassinated by one of his officers, 
A.D. 385. 

The ' Augustan History' concludes at this point with Lives of Carus, Carinus, 
and Numerian, the work of their contemporary, Fl. Vopiscus. 

23. The period of extreme military licence here terminates. 
For ninety-two years, from a.d. 193 to 284, the soldiers had en- 

^ ^ , joyed almost continuously the privilege of appoint- 
review of ing whomsoever they pleased to the office of supreme 
e perio . j-u^gj.^ In a few instances they had allowed a fa- 
vourite prince — a Severus, a Valerian, a Claudius, a Carus — to 
nominate an associate or a successor ; and on one occasion they 
had put the nomination unreservedly into the hands of the Senate • 
but generally they had asserted and maintained their right, at each 
vacancy of the throne, to choose and proclaim the Imperator. 
They had likewise taken upon themselves to remove by assassina- 
tion even the rulers of their own choice, when they became 
oppressive or in any way unpopular. Ten Emperors had thus 
perished by military violence in the space of sixty-six years 
(a.d. 317 to 283), among them the virtuous Alexander, the mild 
Gordianus, the excellent Probus — and thus every Emperor knew 
that he held office simply during the good pleasure of the troops, 
and that if he offended them, his life would be the forfeit. Such 



PABT I. PER. VI.] CAR US TO DIOCLETIAN. 517 

a system was tolerable in only one respect — it tended naturally to 
place power in the hands of able generals. But its evils far more 
than counterbalanced this advantage. Besides the general sense 
of insecurity which it produced, and the absence of anything like 
plan or steady system in the administration, consequent upon the 
rapid change of rulers, it necessarily led to the utter demoralisation 
of the army, which involved as a necessary result the absolute ruin 
of the Empire. The army was, under the Imperial system, the 
' salt ' of the Roman world ; to corrupt it was to sap the very life 
of the State. Yet how could discipline be maintained, when every 
general was bent on ingratiating himself with his troops, in the 
hope of gaining what had come to be regarded as the great prize 
of his profession, and every Emperor was aware that to institute 
a searching reform would be to sign his own death-warrant ? It 
was fortunate for Rome that she had powerful enemies upon her 
frontiers. But for the pressure thus put both upon the men and 
the officers, her armies would have degenerated much more rapidly 
than they actually did, and her ruin would have been precipitated. 



THIRD SECTION. 

From the Accession 0/ Diocletian, a.d. 284, to the final Divisiott 0/ the 
Empire, a.d. 395. 

Sources. Besides the Epitomists, Eutropius, Aurelius Victor, Rufus, 
ZoNARAS, and Orosius, the most important authorities for this period are, 
(i) ZosiMUS, whose Historia Nova covers the space between the accession of 
Macrinus, a.d. 217, and the sixteenth year of Honorius, a.d. 410 ; (2) Ammi- 
ANUS Marcellinus, whose eighteen books oi Histories contain a prolix account 
of the events which happened between a.d. 353 and 378 ; and (3) the obscure 
authors of the Panegyrics, Mamertinus, Eumenius, Nazarius, &c., who must 
be consulted for the entire period between Diocletian and Theodosius (a. d. 
284 to 395). Of inferior importance, yet still of considerable value, are the 
Christian writers, EUSEBIUS (Historia Ecclesiastica ; ed. BuRTON. Oxoniis, 
1856; 8vo., and Fita Constantini Magni ; ed. Heinichen. Lipsise, 1830), Lac- 
TANTius (Opera. Biponti, 1786 ; 2 vols. 8vo.), John OF Malala (in C. MiJL- 
ler's Fragm. Hist. Grcec, vol. iv.), JOHN OF Antioch (in the same collection), 
Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret, Evagrius, &c. The Armenian History of 
Moses of Choren is occasionally serviceable (see above, p. 305). Another 
important source is the Codex Theodosiatius (ed. SiSMONDi. Lipsise, 1736-45; 
6 vols, folio), which gives the laws passed between a.d. 313 and 438, and the 
Codex Justinianus (ed. Kriegel. Lipsias, 1844; 3 vols. 8vo.), which contains 
numerous laws of Emperors between Hadrian and Constantine. Coins, medals, 
and inscriptions are also valuable for the period. 

Among modern works treating especially, or inclusively, of the period, are 
the following : — 



51 8 ROME. [BOOKV. 

Le Beau, Histoire du Bas-Empire commengant a Constantin le Grand (con- 
tinued by Ameilhon). Paris, 1824; 20 vols. 8vo. 

Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (see p. 501). Chapters xiii. to 
xxviii. treat of this period. 

Niebuhr, Lectures on the History of Rome ; edited by Dr, L. Schmitz. London, 
1849 ; 3 vols. Svo. Lectures cxxix. to cxxxviii. 

T. With the accession of Diocletian the declining Empire expe- 
rienced another remarkable revival, a revival, moreover, of a new 
Fresh revival character, involving many changes, and constituting 
of the Empire, a fresh phase of Imperialism, which contrasts strongly 
stronger phase with the previous One. Power passed away from the 
of Imperialism, hands of the soldiers, and tended to become dynastic ; 
the principle of association, adopted on a wide scale, gave stability 
to the government j the helm of the state was grasped by firm 
hands, and various new arrangements were made, all favourable 
to absolutism. Such restraint as the Senate had up to this time 
exercised on the despotic authority of the Emperors — a restraint 
slightest no doubt in the cases where it w^s most needed, yet still 
in the worst case not wholly nugatory — was completely removed 
by the departure of the Court from Rome, and the erection of 
other cities — Nicomedia, Milan, Constantinople — into seats of 
government. When Rome was no longer the capital, the Roman 
Senate became a mere municipal body, directing the affairs of a 
single provincial town ; and as its lost privileges were not trans- 
ferred to another assembly^ the Emperor remained the sole source 
of law, the sole fountain of honour, the one and only principle 
of authority. Again, the influence of the Prgetorians, who, in 
their fortified camp, at once guarding and commanding Rome, had 
constituted another check on the absolute power of the Princes, 
ceased with the reforms of Diocletian and Constantine, who re- 
spectively diminished their numbers and suppressed them. The 
Orientalisation of the Court, the comparative seclusion of the 
monarch, and the multiplication of officers and ceremonies, weak- 
ened, if it did not even destroy, such little control as public opinion 
had hitherto exercised over the caprices of the monarch. Above 
all, the multiplication of Emperors and the care taken to secure 
the throne against such an occurrence as a vacancy^ took from the 
legionaries the power, which they had so long exercised and so 
much abused, of making and destroying monarchs at their will, 
and placed the Imperial authority almost beyond the risk of danger 
from military violence. 



PART I. PEE. VI.] NEW PHASE OF IMPERIALISM. ' 519 

1. While the principle of authority was thus gaining in strength, 
and the anarchy which had prevailed for more than half a century 
was giving place to the firm, if somewhat over-despo- _ 

. ^, r ■ , r, , 1 . /■ Establishment 

tic, rule of princes who felt themselves secure in their of Christianity 
possession of the throne, another quite separate and ^^ the state 

■^ 3 T. r religion, an 

most important change was taking place, whereby infusion of 
new life was infused into the community. Christ- 
ianity, hitherto treated as inimical to the State, contemned and 
ignored, or else down- trodden and oppressed, found itself at length 
taken into favour by the civil power, being first tolerated by Ga- 
lerius, after he had vainly endeavoured to root it out, and then 
established by Constantine. As there can be no doubt that by 
this time the great mass of the intellect and virtue of the nation 
had passed over to the Christian side, the State cannot but have 
gained considerably by a change which enabled it to employ freely 
these persons. 

3. But scarcely any political change is without its drawbacks. 
The establishment of Christianity as the State Religion, while 
it alienated those who still adhered to heathenism, 

-' Advantages 

tended to corrupt Christianity itself, which perse- of the 
cution had kept pure, turned the attention of the ^'eakenedT^ 
rulers from the defence and safety of the Empire to certain ill 
minute questions of heterodoxy and orthodoxy, and 
engaged the civil power in new struggles with its own subjects, 
whom it was called upon to coerce as heretics or schismatics. 
Moreover, the adoption of Christianity by a state, all whose ante- 
cedents were bound up with heathenism, was like the putting of a 
' new patch on an old garment,' which could not bear the altera- 
tion. All the old associations, all the old motives to self-sacrifice 
and patriotism, all the old watchwords and rallying cries were 
discredited ; and new ones, in harmony with the new religion, 
could not at once be extemporised. A change of religion_, even 
though from false to true, cannot but shake a nation to its very 
core; and the Roman body-politic was too old and too infirm 
not to suffer severely from such a disturbance. The change 
came too late thoroughly to revive and renovate ; it may there- 
fore, not improbably, have weakened and helped towards dis- 
solution. 

4. Nor were the other political changes of the period wholly and 
altogether beneficial. The partition of the supreme power among 



520 ROME. [book v. 

numerous co-ordinate Emperors was a fertile source of quarrel and 

misunderstanding, and gave rise to frequent civil 

^the^ther'"^ wars. The local principle on which the partition 

changes of ^^vas made increased the tendency towards a dis- 

the period. . ^,t-... ^ i-iii 

ruption of the Empire into fragments^ which had 
already manifested itself (see p. 5 1 3) . The degradation of Rome 
and the exaltation of rival capitals worked in the same direction, 
and was likewise a breaking with the past which could not but be 
trying and hazardous. The completer despotism gave, no doubt, 
new vigour to the administration ; but it was irksome and revolt- 
ing to the feelings of many, more especially in the provinces of 
the West ; it alienated their affections, and prepared them to 
submit readily to a change of governors. 

5, But, if the remedies devised by the statesmen of the Dio- 
cletianic period were insufficient to restore the Empire to its 

pristine strength and vigour, at any rate they acted 
advantage in ^s stimulants, and revived the moribund State very 
favour of the wonderfully for a space of time not inconsiderable. 

changes. ' ■ r t^- i 

From the accession of Diocletian to the death of 
Theodosius the Great (a.d. 284 to 395), is a period exceeding a 
century. During the whole of it, Rome maintained her frontiers 
and her unity, rolled back each wave of invasion as it broke upon 
her, and showed herself superior to all the surrounding peoples. 
For the gleam of glory which thus gilds her closing day, must we 
not regard her as in a great meas.ure indebted to the reforms of 
Diocletian and Constantine ? 

6. Diocletian was proclaimed Emperor by the soldiers, in Sep- 
tember, A.D. 384. He defeated Carinus, and entered on his full 

sovereignty, in the following year. His first public 

Diocletian and measure (a.d. 286) was to associate in the Empire, 

Maximian, under the title of ' Augustus ' his comrade in arms, 

A.D. 284-305. . . D 3 5 

Galerius and Maximian, a man who had risen from the ranks, and 
^°ciTrs^^ who had few merits beside that of being a good 
general. A few years later (a.d. 392), he completed 
his scheme of government by the further creation of two ' Caesars,* 
who were to stand to the two 'Augusti' as sons and successors. 
Galerius and Constantius, selected respectively for this important 
office by Diocletian and Maximian, were both of them active and 
able generals, younger than their patrons, and well suited to fill 
the position which was assigned to them. They readily accepted 



PART I. PER. VI. J DIOCLETIAN. 521 

the offers of the two Emperors, and, after repudiating their own 
wives, married respectively the daughter and the step-daughter of 
their patrons. The Imperial College being thus complete, Diocle- 
tian proceeded to a division of the Empire analogous to that which 
had formerly taken place under the Triumvirs (see p. 447). Re- 
serving to the elder ' Augusti ' the more settled provinces, he 
assigned to the ' Cxsars' those which required the care of younger 
and more active men. Gaul, Spain, and Britain, with the defence 
of the Rhine against the Germans, were entrusted to Constantius ; 
the Danubian provinces, Noricum, Pannonia, and Moesia, to Ga- 
lerius ; Italy and Africa to Maximian ; while Diocletian himself 
retained Thrace^ Macedon, Egypt, and the East. It was under- 
stood, however, that the unity of the Empire was to be preserved ; 
the '^Csesars' were to be subordinate to the 'Augusti;' and the 
younger 'Augustus' was to respect the superior dignity of the 
elder. The four princes were to form an Imperial ' Board ' or 
' College,' and were to govern the whole State by their united 
wisdom. 

On the relative position of the 'Augusti' and the ' Caesars,' the reader may- 
consult a Dissertation by Manso at the end of his Leben Constantins des Grossen 
(seep. 513). 

7. The complex governmental system thus established by Dio- 
cletian worked thoroughly well while he himself retained the 
superintendence of the machine which he had in- 
vented. No quarrels arose ; the ' Csesars ' restrained the new system 
themselves within the limits set them: and Maxi- of government. 

' Wars of the 

mian was always ready to submit his judgment to period 
that of his benefactor. Many dangers from without, P^'o^peroub. 
and some from within, threatened the State ; but they were met 
with energy and combated with success by the imperial rulers. 
In Britain, for a while (a.d. 287 to 293), a rebel chief, Carausius, 
a German probably, defied the Roman arms, and maintained an 
independent sovereignty ; but the authority of Rome was re-estab- 
lished in this quarter (a.d. 396) by the victories of Constantius. 
Maximian put down the troubles which, as early as a.d. 387, had 
broken out in Gaul; while at a later date (a.d. 297), Constantius 
delivered the same province from a furious invasion of the Ale- 
manni. Galerius, after maintaining for many years the honour of 
the Roman arms upon the Danube, engaged the Persians in the 
far East, and although at first signally defeated (a.d. 297), made 



52 2 ROME. [BOOK V. 

up for his defeat by a great victory in the year following, which 
led to a peace very advantageous to the Romans. Finally, Dio- 
cletian and Maximian subdued revolt in Africa, chastised the 
Moors and the Egyptians, and put to death the pretenders who 
had raised the standard of revolt in those regions. 

Details of the British and Persian Wars, (i) British War. Revolt 
of Carausius, a.d. 287. He is attacked by Maximian and repulses him, a.d. 
289. Peace made; Carausius allowed the title of Augustus, a.d. 290. Death 
of Carausius, who is murdered by his first minister, Allectus, a.d. 293. Allectus 
becomes king. Landing of Constantius in Britain, a.d. 296. Defeat and death 
of Allectus, and recovery of the island. (2) Persian War. War provoked 
by the Romans, who seize Armenia and make it over to their vassal, Tiridates, 
a.d. 286. Armenia recovered by the Persians, a.d. 296. Galerius enters 
Mesopotamia, a.d. 297, and, after one or two indecisive engagements, is met 
and defeated by the Persians near Carrhse (Harran). Having collected a new 
army, he advances through Armenia upon Assyria, and defeats the Persian 
king, Narses, in the mountains, a.d. 298. Peace is made the same year, by the 
cession to the Romans of several small provinces beyond the Tigris, and the 
enlargement of the dominions of Tiridates, 

8. But while success attended the arms of Diocletian and his col- 
leagues against whatever enemy they were turned, whether foreign 

Defects in ^^ domestic, the results achieved by the internal 
the internal administration of the Empire were less satisfactory. 

administration. .^, ., . t^-i- -i 

Persecution of After long Consideration, Diocletian determined, to- 
the Christians, -^^ards the close of A. D. 302, to compel uniformity of 
religion, and for this purpose issued an edict against the Christians 
(a.d. 303), which led to terrible excesses. Throughout the entire 
Empire, except in the extreme West, where Constantius protected 
those of the ' new religion,' one half of the community found itself 
proscribed ; the most relentless persecution followed ; thousands 
were put to death in almost every province; the churches were 
demolished, endowments confiscated, the sacred books burnt, 
meetings for worship prohibited, the clergy declared enemies of 
the State. A war of extermination commenced, to which there 
seemed to be no end ; for, as usual, the ' blood of the martyrs' 
proved the ' seed of the Church,' and the ranks of the Christians 
were replenished as fast as they were thinned. A state of things 
worse than civil war prevailed, authority being engaged in a con- 
flict in which it could not succeed, and being thus brought into 
disrepute, while the most cruel sufferings were day by day inflicted 
on the citizens who were least deserving of them. 

9. Nor was suffering at this period confined to the Christians. 
The establishment of four Courts instead of one, and the multi- 



PART I. PER. VI.] ABDICATION OF DIOCLETIAN. 523 

plication of officials and of armies, vastly augmented the expendi- 
ture : and a heavy increase of taxation was the ne- 

• J J General 

cessary consequence. The provinces groaned under suffering from 
the burthen of oppressive imposts ; which were wrung oppressive 

tcixD,tion. 

from the reluctant tax-payer by violence and even 
by torture. Industry sank beneath a system which left it without 
reward ; production diminished ; and the price of all commodities 
rose. To meet this evil, a futile attempt was made to fix by law 
a maximum of prices for all the necessaries, and most of the com- 
modities, of life, for corn, wine, and oil, salt, honey, butcher's- 
meat, vegetables, clothes, fish, fruit, labourers' wages, schoolmasters' 
and advocates' fees, boots and shoes, harness, timber, and beer. 
Such an interference with the natural course of trade could only 
aggravate the evils which it was intended to allay. 

The celebrated ' Edict of Diocletian,' discovered by Col. Leake at Eski- 
Hissar in Asia Minor appears to have been issued in a.d. 301. It runs 
in the name of the four Emperors, and fixes the price of all the articles 
above named, and of many others, in denarii. An excellent edition of the 
Edict has been published by Mommsen, under the title. Das Edict Diocletians 
de pretiis rerum 'venalium. Leipzig, 1851 ; 8vo. 

10. The severe illness which afflicted Diocletian in a.d. 304, was 
probably the chief cause determining him on the most celebrated 
act of his life — his abdication. His health made 
rest necessary for himj and he may naturally have and^Max?mkn 
desired to preside over the steps which required to abdicate, 
be taken in order to secure the continuance of his Severus and 
system after he himself should have quitted life. Maximm are 
Accordingly, he formally abdicated his power in 
A.D. 305, after a reign of twenty-one years, and compelled Maxi- 
mian to do the same. The two ' Caesars,' Galerius and Constantius, 
became hereupon ' Augusti,' and should, according to the original 
design of Diocletian, have respectively succeeded to the provinces 
of the East and of the West, and have each appointed a ' Cxsar' 
to rule a portion of his dominions. But the partiality of Diocle- 
tian for his own ' Caesar' and son-in-law, Galerius, or his conviction 
that the Empire required a chief ruler to prevent it from breaking 
up, produced a modification of the original plan. Galerius, with 
Diocletian's sanction, appointed both the new 'Caesars,' and as- 
signed them their governments, giving to his nephew Maximin, 
Syria and Egypt, to his friend Severus, Italy and Africa. Con- 
stantius simply retained what he already had. Galerius reserved 



52 4 ' ROME. [book v. 

for his own share the entire tract between Gaul and Syria, and 
was thus master, in his own person or by his deputies, of three- 
fourths of the Empire. 

II. The new partition of the Empire was followed shortly by 

the death of Constantius, who expired at York, July 34, a.d. 306. 

On his decease, the legions immediately proclaimed 

dies, A.D. 306. ^is son, Constantine, his successor. This was an 

Severus is made infringement of the new order of things : but Gale- 

' Augustus.' . ^° , ,^ , ,. , , . 1 

rius felt himself obliged to condone it, and to recog- 
nise a legitimate ' Csesar ' in the new prince, while he raised 
Severus to the rank of ^ Augustus.' The harmony of the Empire 
was thus still preserved, in spite of the irregularity which had 
threatened to disturb it, and the Roman world continued to be 
still amicably governed by four princes, two of whom were ^ Au- 
gusti ' and two ' Csesars.' 

13. But it was not long before the tranquillity was inter- 
rupted. Maxentius, son of Maximian^ took advantage of the 
Revolt of discontent prevalent in Rome and Italy owing 
Maxentius; to the loss of privilege and dignity, to raise 

joint rule of , ^ ^ r ^ 1 • -1 

six Emperors, the Standard of revolt, assume the imperial or- 

A.D. 307-309. naments, and boldly proclaim himself Emperor. 

His father, Maximian, joined him, and resumed the rank of 

' Augustus.' In vain Severus hurried to Rome, and endeavoured 

to crush the insurrection. Abandoned by his troops, he fell into 

his enemy's hands, and was compelled to end his life by suicide, 

A.D. 307. In vain Galerius, at the head of all the forces of the 

central and eastern provinces, sought to impose his will on the 

rebellious Romans and Italians j after a short campaign he was 

obliged to retreat without effecting anything. Maximian and 

Maxentius, who had allied themselves with Constantine, held their 

ground successfully against the efforts of their antagonists ; and 

for a brief space the Empire was administered peacefully by six 

Emperors, Constantine, Maximian, and Maxentius in the West ; 

in the East, Galerius, Maximin, and Licinius, who had received 

the imperial dignity from Galerius after the death of Severus. 

13. The inherent evil of the new system of government now 

Wars between began to show itself. First, Maximian and Maxen- 

the Emperors ; ^jyg quarrelled, and the former was forced to take 

reunion of the ^ ^ t-^ • \ ■ 

Empire under refuge with Constantine. Then Constantine him- 
^a"d^324 ^' ^^^^ '^'^^ ^° defend his position against the intrigues 



PAKT I. PER. VI.] CONSTANTINE. 525 

of his father-in-law, and having defeated him, put him to death, 
A.D. 310. In the next year Galerius perished by the miserable 
death which has often befallen persecutors j and the rulers of the 
Roman world were thus reduced to four, Constantine in the West, 
Maxentius in Italy and Africa, Licinius in Ulyricum and Thrace, 
Maximin in Egypt and Asia. But no friendly feeling now united 
the members of the Imperial College. War broke out between 
Constantine and Maxentius in a.d. 312, and between Licinius 
and Maximin in the year following. In each case the struggle 
was soon decided. Constantine vanquished his adversary in two 
battles — one near Verona, the other at the Colline gate — and 
became master of Rome and Italy. Maxentius perished in the 
Tiber. Maximin was defeated by Licinius in a single great fight, 
near Heracleia^ but the victory was decisive, being followed 
shortly by the defeated Emperor's suicide. It remained that the 
two victors, lords respectively of the East and of the West, should 
measure their strength against each other. This they did in 
A.D. 314; and after a long and bloody struggle, interrupted by 
an interval of peace (a.d. 315 to 3:^2), victory declared itself in 
favour of the Western legions, and Constantine, who is not with- 
out reason given the epithet of ' the Great,' became sole master of 
the reunited Roman Empire. The defeated Licinius was, as a 
matter of course, put to death, a.d. 324. 

Details of the War between Constantine and Licinius, a.d. 3 14 to 324. 
War provoked by the intrigues of Licinius. First battle at Gibalis on the 
Save. Licinius, defeated vpith great loss, escapes with difficulty, a.d. 314. 
Second battle at Mardia in Thrace. Constantine again successful. Peace 
made. Pannonia, Ulyricum, Moesia (or Dacia), Macedonia, and Greece ceded 
to Constantine. Peace broken by the ambition of Constantine, who is bent 
on obtaining the whole Empire, a.d. 323. Licinius, defeated near Hadrian- 
ople, throws himself into Byzantium. Siege of Byzantium and flight of Lici- 
nius to Asia. Last battle at Chrysopolis in Bithynia. Licinius, once more 
defeated, submits, and is put to death, a.d. 324. 

14. The reign of Constantine the Great is the turning-point of 
this period of the history. He completed the revolution which 
Diocletian had begun. By his entire abolition of 

Reign of 

the Prsetorians, and conversion of their Prefects into Constantine, 
purely civil officers, he secured the State as far as ^' 306-337. 

'- ' ' He carries out 

was possible from the tyranny of the sword. By the the system of 
erection of his new capital, and the formal transfer 
of the seat of government from Rome to Byzantium, he put the 
finishing stroke to the degradation of the old metropolis, destroyed 



526 ROME. [book v. 

for ever the power of the Senate, and freed the Emperors from all 
those galling restrictions which old constitutional forms and usages 
imposed upon them. By his organisation of the Court on a 
thoroughly Eastern model, he stamped finally on the later Empire 
the character of Orientalism which attaches to it. Finally, by his 
new division of the Empire into Trefectures^ and his assignment of 
different portions of his dominions to his sons and nephews, on 
whom he conferred the titles of ' Cassar,' or ' King,' he maintained 
in a modified form the principles of a federated as distinct from a 
centralized government, and of joint as distinct from sole rule, 
which was the most original, and at the same time the most 
doubtful, of Diocletian^'s conceptions. 

An excellent account of the new organisation of the Empire under Con- 
stantine has been written by Marquardt, and will be found in Becker's 
Handbuch der Komischen Alterthilmer, vol. iii. part i. (Leipzig, 1843-64 ; 5 vols. 
8vo.) The chief points of the organisation were the following : — 

The whole Empire was divided into four Prsefectures {^rafecturce), each 
under its Praetorian Prefect {prcefectus prcetor'to). These were, I. The Pre- 

^ feeture of the Gauls (j>rcEfectura Galliarum), comprising 

ment of the three dioceses, each under a Vicar (yicarius), those, namely, 
provinces. °^ ^^) Spain, (2) Gaul, or the Seven Provinces, and 
(3) Britain ; which were further subdivided into governments, 
under Consulars {consulares^ or Presidents {prcesides), seven in Spain, seven- 
teen in Gaul, and five in Britain — Total, 29. II. The Prefecture of Italy, 
comprising likewise three dioceses, those of (i) the City of Rome, (2) Italy, 
and (3) Africa, and subdivided into thirty governments, under Consulars, Pre- 
sidents, Correctors {correctores) or Dukes {duces^, five in Africa, ten in the 
diocese of the city of Rome, which corresponded to Southern and Central 
Italy, and fourteen in the Italian diocese, which comprised North Italy, 
Rhsetia, Pannonia, Noricum, and Dalmatia — Total, 30, III. The Prefecture 
of lUsrricum, divided into two dioceses, (i) Dacia, and (2) Macedonia, the 
former comprising five and the latter six governments ; to which must be 
further added Achsea, which had its own Proconsul. Total number of govern- 
ments, 12. IV. The Prefecture of the East {prafectura Orientis), which 
contained five dioceses, those of (i) the East (^Orientis), (2) Egypt, (3) Asia, 
(4) Pontus, and (5) Thrace ; forming altogether forty-six governments, under 
Consulars, Presidents, Correctors, Dukes, and Counts (^comites'), fifteen of which 
were in ' the East,' or Syria and Mesopotamia, six in the diocese of Egypt, 
eight in that of 'Asia' (Asia Minor), eleven in Pontus, and six in Thrace; 
while two others were extra-diocesan, those of the Hellespont and the Greek 
islands. Total, in this Prefecture, 48, Grand total of governments in the 
four Prefectures, 119. 

The organisation of the court was as follows : At its head were seven chief 
officers — (i) the Grand Chamberlain {propositus sancti cubiculi'); under whom 

Organisation ^^^' ^^^*' ^^^ deputy (vicarius), and secondly, the Counts of 
of the court and ^^^ Palace and the Bedchamber {comites palatii and cubicularit), 
its officers. ^^° ^^*^ ^^ superintendence respectively of the royal table 
and wardrobe, and were marshalled in four divisions. (2) The 
Chancellor, or ' Master of the Offices' (magister officiorum), who was at once a 
judge and a minister, it being his duty to determine all causes in which per- 
sons connected with the court were concerned, to receive and answer memo- 
rials, to direct the ports and arsenals, and to receive the envoys of foreign 
powers. The business of this important functionary was transacted in four 



PAKT I. PER. VI.] REFORMS OF CONSTANTINE. 527 

distinct offices {scrin'ia), and employed 148 clerks. (3) The Quaestor, an 
officer who has no correspondent in modern times. He was the organ of the 
Emperor in legislation, composed and usually suggested his Edicts, and resolved 
the doubts of inferior judges. (4) The Treasurer-General, or ' Count of the 
Sacred Largesses '(cowej sacrarum largitionum), who superintended the collection 
and disbursement of the revenue, a business conducted in eleven different 
offices, and employing several hundreds of people. (5) The Master of the 
Privy Purse {comes rei principis'), who managed the Emperor's private estate. 
(6) and (7) The two Commanders of the Household troops (comites domesti- 
corum), the heads respectively of the two bands of cavalry and infantry, which 
had taken the place of the old Praetorians, and watched over the safety of the 
Emperor. This service was now entrusted almost exclusively to Armenians ! 

The chief authority for these details is the Notitia dignitatum utriusque Im- 
perii, of which a good edition has been published by Bocking. (Bonnae, 1839- 
53 ; 2 vols. 8vo.) 

15. But the reforms of Constantine were not limited by the 
range of his predecessor's conceptions. He established^ not merely 
at the court, but throughout the Empire, a graduated Further 
nobility, the archetype of the modern systems, mainly reforms of 
but not wholly official, composed of three ranks : Creation of 
(i) the illustrious' {illustres)-^ (2) the 'Respectable' a nobility. 
{sfectabtles)-^ and (3) the 'Right Honourable' {clar'issimi). To the 
' Illustrious' class belonged (<?) the Consuls during their term of 
office^ (Jj) the Patricians, life Peers, who received the title of 
'Patricius' at the will of the Emperor; (c) the Prsetorian Prefects, 
six in number, four provincial and two metropolitan — the Prefects 
respectively of Rome and Constantinople ; id) the Masters-General 
of the cavalry and infantry ; and ie) the seven chief officers of the 
court, mentioned in the preceding section. Under the head of 
'Respectable' were included [a) the Proconsuls of Asia, Africa, 
and Achaea ; (^) the heads of the thirteen dioceses, whatever their 
special title, whether Vicar, Count, or Augustal Prefect ; and 
(c) the second rank of officers in the army, thirty-five in number, 
of whom ten were 'Counts' and the remainder 'Dukes.' The 
subordinate governors of provinces, Consulars, Presidents, and 
Correctors, together with the other members of the Roman and 
Constantinopolitan Senates constituted the class of ' Right Hon- 
ourables' or 'Clarissimi.' Constantine likewise re- Reorganisation 
organised the Roman army. He multiplied the °^ ^^^ zxxaj. 
number and reduced the strength of the legions, which were raised 
from thirty or thirty-one to a hundred and thirty-two, while the 
strength of each sank from 6000 to 1000 or 1500. He divided the 
soldiers into the two classes of ' Palatines' and ' Borderers,' the 
former quartered in the chief towns of the Empire, the latter 



528 ROME. [book v. 

stationed upon the frontiers. The whole army he placed under 
two (later, under four) commanders, called respectively, ' Master 
of the Horse ^ [magister equttuw) and ' Master of the Foot' {magister 
feditum\ but each practically commanding mixed armies in the 
field. Next in rank to them were the various *^ Counts ' and 
' Dukes,^ who acted as lieutenant or divisional generals, and were 
stationed in the more exposed provinces. 

1 6. It is not certain that Constantine made any change in the 
nature or amount of the taxes which the Imperial government 

exacted from its subiects. But the fact that the 

Commence- •' 

ment of the ' Era of Indictions ' dates from a year within his 
' Indictions.' j.^.gj^ ^ggp^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^^^ would Seem to imply that 

the practice of making a new survey of the Empire for financial 
purposes every fifteen years was commenced by him. The land- 
tax {capitatto or indictio)^ with its supplement, the poll-tax {capitatio 
humana or pleheia)., the tax on trades {aurum lustrale)^ the indirect 
taxes, customs, &c., the forced contributions {aurum coronarium) 
were, all of them, imposts of old standing at this time ^ and it is 
not easy to see that Constantine added any others. He was prob- 
ably rigid in his exaction of taxes, and may have been the first 
to require that all payments to the treasury should be made in 
gold ; but the charge of oppressing his subjects by the imposition 
of new and unheard-of burthens, which rests upon the sole testi- 
mony of the prejudiced Zosimus, is certainly ' not proven.' 

The ' Era of the Indictions ' did not come into use till the twelfth century, 
and thus belongs to modern, rather than to ancient, history. But the financial 
employment of a cycle of fifteen years probably dates from the seventh year 
of Constantine. 

On the general subject of the later Roman taxation the student should con- 
sult the great work of Savigny, Geschichte des Romischen Rechts im Mittelalter. 
Heidelberg, 1 834-1 851 ; 7 vols. 8vo. Second edition. 

17. But the great change, the crowning reform, introduced and 
carried through by Constantine was his reformation of religion. 

_, , Here he did not so much go beyond as directly con- 

the State tradict the ideal of Diocletian. Diocletian, and 

Heathenism ^^^^ ^^^ Galerius, had endeavoured to destroy 

discarded. Christianity, root and branch, by the fire of per- 

allianoemade secution. But they had failed; and Galerius had 

with Chris- acknowledged the failure by an edict issued from 

tianity. , , f 1 , ■ , 

his death-bed, which permitted to the Christians 
the free exercise of their religion, and invited them to aid the 



PAKT I. PEE. VI.] CHARACTER OF CONSTANTINE. 529 

suffering Emperor by their prayers. Galerius, however, and the 
Emperors of his appointment, though they tolerated Christianity, 
had remained heathens, and had continued to maintain heathenism 
as the State rehgion. It remained for Constantine, not merely to 
tolerate, but in a certain sense to establish, the new religion ; to 
recognise its bishops and clergy as privileged persons, to con- 
tribute largely towards its endowment, to allow the meetings and 
give effect to the decrees of its councils, to conform the juris- 
prudence of the State to its precepts and its practices. Hence 
the laws against infanticide, against adultery, against 
paederasty, against rape and seduction passed at this changes in 

period: hence the edict for the general observance thejuns- 
■^ -^ ° prudence. 

of Sunday, and the new and strong restrictions upon 

the facility of divorce. Constantine did not indeed, ash s some- 
times been supposed, proscribe heathenism; he did not shut up 
the temples, neither did he forbid the offering of sacrifice. But 
he completely dissociated the State from heathenism, and to 
a certain extent allied it with Christianity ; he stopped all magis- 
terial offering of sacrifice ; he shut up the temples where the ritual 
was immoral. Though not a haptized Christian till shortly before 
his death, he threw the whole weight of his encouragement on the 
Christian side ; and the rapid increase in the number of professing 
Christians, which now set in, must be regarded as in great part 
the effect of his patronage. 

1 8. The character of Constantine has been variously estimated, 
according as his patronage of Christianity has been liked or dis- 
liked. The most impartial writers view him as character of 
a man in whom vice and virtue, weakness and Constantine. 
strength of mind were curiously blended. His military talents 
and his power of organisation are incontestable. His activity, 
courage, prudence, and affectionateness cannot be questioned. 
But he was less clement and humane than it was to have been 
expected that the first Christian Emperor would have shown him- 
self; he was strangely superstitious ; and his religion, so far as it 
can be gathered from his public acts, his coins, his medals, and his 
recorded speeches, was a curious medley of Christianity and 
paganism, which it is not pleasant to contemplate. His character 
deteriorated as time went on. His best period is that of his 
administration of Gaul, a. d. 306 to 312. As he grew older, he 
became more suspicious, more irritable, more harsh and severe in 

M m 



530 ROME. [book v. 

his punishments. The darkest shadow which rests upon his reign 
is connected with the execution of his son^ Crispus, and his 
nephew, Licinius, events of the year a. d. 326 ; but it is impos- 
sible to say whether these acts were, or were not, a State necessity 
— whether they punished a contemplated crime, or were cruelties 
which had their origin in a wicked and unworthy jealousy. The 
harmony which subsisted between Constantine and his other sons, 
and the kindness which he showed towards his half-brothers and 
their offspring, may reasonably incline us to the belief that in the 
great tragedy of his domestic life, Constantine was rather unfor- 
tunate than guilty. 

The story that Constantine put to death his second wife, Fausta, on the 
charge of intriguing with a groom, discredited even by Gibbon, is more than 
doubtful. 

19. The later years of Constantine were troubled by the barba- 
rians of the North and East, who once more assumed the aggressive, 
and invaded, or threatened to invade, the Roman 
?igns with territory. In the vigour of his youth and middle age 
respect to the he had repelled such attacks in person, defeating the 
Franks and Alemanni in Gaul, a. d. 309, and the 
Goths and Sarmatians upon the Danube, a. d. 332. Less active 
as he approached old age, he employed the arms of his eldest son, 
Constantine, to chastise the Goths in a. d. 333, and allowed the 
hostile proceedings of the Persians (a, d. 336) to pass unrebuked. 
At the same time he made preparations for the succession, in anti- 
cipation of his own demise, creating his third son, Constans, and 
his nephew, Dalmatius, ' Caesars,' making another nephew, Hanni- 
balianus. Rex, and assigning to these two nephews and his three 
His death, surviving sons the administration of different por- 
A D. 337. tions of his dominions. Constantine died, May 22, 
a. D. 337, having reigned nearly thirty-one years. 

The young Constantine was assigned the prafectura Galliarum ; Constantius 
the prmfectura Orientis, excepting Pontus, Cappadocia, and Armenia Minor ; 
Constans the preefectura Italia ; Dalmatius the prafectura Illyrici. Hanniba- 
lianus received Pontus, Cappadocia, and Armenia Minor for his * kingdom.' 

Several Lin)es of Constantine the Great have been written. The best is 
that of 

Manso, J. C. F., Leben Constantins des Grossen. Breslau, 1817 ; 8vo. 

The student may also consult with advantage 

BURKHARDT, J., Die Zeit Constantins des Grossen. Basel, 1853 ; royal Svo. 

The dealings of Constantine with the Christians and the ecclesiastical aspect 
of his reign are best given in Dean Milman's History of Christianity (3 vols. 
8vo., London, 1840), vol. ii. 



PART I. PER. VI.] THE SONS OF CONSTANTINE. 531 

20. The designs of Constantine with respect to the succession 
were not allowed to take full effect. Troubles followed close upon 
his decease, which led to the removal of Dalmatius 

and Hannibalianus, and the murder of most of their of the three 
near relations and partisans. The three sons of ^ ^^"^ °f 

^ Constantine. 

Constantine divided his dominions between them, 
Constantine retaining the portion assigned him by his father, viz. 
the Gauls, Constans receiving the share of Dalmatius besides his 
own, and Constantius absorbing the ' kingdom ' of Hannibalianus. 
But the brothers could not long remain at peace among themselves. 
Constantine, the eldest^ discontented with his share, required 
Constans to relinquish to him the diocese of Africa, and when the 
latter demurred, invaded his territories and sought to compel the 
surrender. He had^ however^ miscalculated his strength, and was 
easily defeated and slain (a. d. 340). Constans took possession of 
his government, but ruling tyrannically was ten years later (a. d. 
350) conspired against by his generals and ministers, one of whom, 
Magnentius, assumed the purple^ captured and slew Constans, 
and reigned in his stead. Meanwhile, Constantius v/as engaged 
in an unsuccessful war against the Persians under Rise and 
their king. Sapor, who aimed at recovering the pro- fall of 
vinces ceded to Galerius by his grandfather. Re- a.d. 

called by the dangerous condition of the West, 350-353. 
where, besides Magnentius, another officer, Vetranio, general in 
Illyricum, had been proclaimed Emperor, Constantius in the space 
of three years (a.d. 350 to '^^^'^ put down all opposition, forcing 
Vetranio to abdicate his dignity and retire into private life 
(a. d. 350), and driving Magnentius, after twice defeating him — 
at Mursa in Pannonia, a, d. 351, and at Mount Seleucus in Gaul, 
A. D. 353 — to take refuge in suicide. Constantius thus, in the 
sixteenth year after the death of his father Constantine, reunited 
under his sole rule the scattered fragments of the Roman world. 

21. The sole reign of Constantius, which lasted from a. d. '>^^'>^ 
to 361, was a period of mixed disaster and success, exhausting to 
the Empire, but not inglorious. His bloody con- g^^g ^^ ^f 
test with Magnentius had greatly weakened the Constantius, 
Roman military force, and exposed the Empire 353I361. 
almost without defence to the attacks of the bar- -^"^ ■^^^^• 
barians. German tribes had been actually encouraged by Con- 
stantius to cross the Rhine, and had planted themselves firmly on 

M m 2 



532 ROME. [book v. 

its left bank. The Quadi and Sarmatians ceased to respect the 
frontier of the Danube. In the East Sapor resumed his aggressive 
operations, and poured his hosts into the Roman province of 
Mesopotamia. But though the Roman arms sustained many 
reverses, especially in the East/ and though the provinces suffered 
grievously from hostile inroads, yet on every side the honour of 
the Empire was upheld or vindicated, and no permanent conquest 
of Roman territory was effected. Constantius repulsed the Quadi 
and attacked them in their own abodes, a. d. 357 ; set a king 
devoted to his interests over the Sarmatte, a. d. 359 j and pre- 
vented Sapor from occupying the regions which he overran with 
his army, 'a. d. 360. In the West, the efforts of Julian were 
crowned with still more decided success. The Franks and Ale- 
manni, defeated in a number of battles (a. d. ^^^6 to 358), eva- 
cuated their new conquests and retired to the right bank of the 
Rhine ^ but even here the vengeance of the Romans followed 
them. Julian led three expeditions across the great river, ravaged 
Germany far and wide, and returned into Gaul with a rich booty. 
32. In his relations with the princes of his family Constantius 
was peculiarly unhappy. At his accession, a. d. 2t?i1:> he had 
sanctioned, if he had not even commanded, the 

His treatment r , • • • i i /- 

of his cousins, Hiassacre of his two surviving uncles and seven of 
Galius and j^jg cousins. Two cousins only, Gallus and Julian, 
boys of six and twelve respectively, he had spared. 
Having no male offspring, and hiving lost his two brothers, who 
died childless, it was only to these two princes that he could look, if 
he desired heirs of his own blood and lineage. Accordingly, when 
the troubles caused by Magnentius summoned him to the West, 
A. D. 350, he drew forth Gallus from the retirement in which he 
bred him up, conferred upon him title of ' Csesar,' and intrusted to 
him the administration of the East. But the ill-trained prince 
having grievously abused his trust, was in a. d. 354 summoned to 
appear before Constantius at Milan, and, when he obeyed, was 
seized while upon his journey, imprisoned and put to death. Shortly 
afterwards (a. d. 't^c^^ Julian was, by the influence of the Empress 
Eusebia, advanced to the dignity made vacant by his half-brother's 
decease and invested with the government of the Gauls j but the 
Emperor was from first to last jealous of his young kinsman and 
harsh in his treatment of him. At length, when he found himself 
about to be deprived of the troops who constituted his sole de- 



PAKT I. PER. VI.] REIGN OF JULIAN. S33 

fence, Julian allowed his soldiers to proclaim him Emperor (a. d. 

360) and marched eastward to maintain his cause in 

arms. Another civil war would have followed had 

not Constantius opportunely died (a. d 361) and left the throne 

open to his rival. 

The persecution of the orthodox Christians by Constantius, and his 
encouragement of Arianism, belong to ecclesiastical rather than to civil his- 
tory. His reign is the time of ' Athanasius contra mundum.' 

23. Julian, the last prince of the house of Constantine, who 
succeeded to the undivided Empire on the death of Constantius, 
was a man of unquestionable ability and of nearly 

, , . , , / , , . . . Reign of 

blameless moral character; but hjs reign was a mis- Julian, 
fortune for the Empire. A pagan from conviction, ogolses 
he not only restored Paganism to its old position as 
the established religion of the State, but endeavoured to destroy 
Christianity by depriving its professors of the advantages of 
wealth, knowledge, and power, and pertinaciously directing against 
them every weapon of petty persecution. The success of his 
enterprise, had it been possible, would have deeply injured the 
State, since it would have substituted a degraded morality and an 
effete religion for an ethical system in which even sceptics can 
find no fault, and a faith whose vitality is evidenced by its 
continuing to exist and to flourish at the present day. But 
success was wholly impossible ; even a partial success could only 
have been gained at the expense of a prolonged civil war j and 
thus the sole result of the Emperor's futile attempt was to cause 
a large amount of actual suffering, to exasperate the two parties 
against each other, and to prolong a struggle which could only end 
in one way. The religious counter-revolution which he designed 
was altogether a mistake and an anachronism; and it was well 
for the Empire that the brevity of his reign confined the time of 
suffering and of struggle within narrow limits. 

24. Nor was the great military expedition which Julian under- 
took against the Persians more fortunate in its results than his 
crusade against the faith of half his subjects. The 
end at which he aimed — the actual destruction of tion against 
the Persian empire — was grand, and the plans which ^^^ ^^^^t'^^' 
he formed for the accomplishment of his object were 
not ill-devised ; but he had underrated the difficulty of his under- 
taking, and had counted too much on all his plans being carried 



534 ROME. [book V. 

out successfully. The allies on whose assistance he reckoned — 
Armenia and Iberia — failed him ^ his second army, which had 
been directed to take the line of the Tigris and join him before 
Ctesiphon, never made its appearance ; he himself accomplished 
without disaster his march along the Euphrates and the Nahr- 
Malcha to the Persian capital, but he found his forces insufficient 
to undertake its siege, and after an imprudent delay he was com- 
pelled, just as the heats of summer were coming on, to commence 
his retreat. But the multitudinous enemy hung about his rear, 
cut ofF his stragglers, deprived him of supplies, and even ventured, 
where the ground was favourable, to occupy and interrupt his line 
of march. Like the Ten Thousand Greeks (see above, p. loi) in 
their retreat through the same regions, the Roman army had day 
after day to fight its way. At length in one of these numerous 
combats Julian fell. The soldiers^ forced to supply 
his place, created the Christian, Jovian, Emperor; 
and Jovian procured himself a safe retreat from Persia with the 
remnant of Julian's army by relinquishing the provinces ceded to 
Galerius in a. d. 248 (see above, § 7), together with a portion of 
Mesopotamia. 

The best account of the Emperor Julian and his times is in the work of 
NeanDER, a., Ueber den Kaiser Julian und sein Zeit-alter. Leipzig, 1812 ; 8vo. 

35. The reign of Jovian lasted only a few months — from June, 

A. D. '^6'^^ to February, a. d. 364 — but it was long enough to 

enable him to reverse his predecessor's religious 

Jovian, changes, and restore Christianity to its former posi- 

^•'°- tion. He conducted the army of Julian from the 

363-364. ■' "^ 

eastern bank of the Tigris to Ancyra in Phrygia, 
religiously performed the stipulations of his treaty with Sapor, 
replaced Athanasius on his episcopal throne, and issued an edict 
of universal toleration. His death, Feb. 17, a.d. 364, was sudden 
and mysterious, but is most probably to be ascribed to natural causes. 
26. An interregnum of ten days followed the death of Jovian. 
At its close the great officials of the Empire took upon themselves 
^ to nominate a monarch, and selected Valentinian, 

Joint reign of 

Valentinian a Christian and a brave officer, who had served with 

VakiTtSkn' ^distinction both on the Rhine and in Persia. The 

A.D. army ratified the choice, but required the new 

Emperor to associate a colleague, being anxious 

(apparently) to prevent the recurrence of such a time of uncer- 



PART I. PER. VI.] JOVIAN TO VALENS. 535 

tainty and suspense as they had just experienced. Valentinian 
conferred the purple on his younger brother, Valens, and com- 
mitted to his hands the administration of the ' prsefectura Orientis/ 
reserving the rest of the Empire for himself. He fixed his court 
at Milan, and from this centre, or sometimes from Treves, he 
governed with vigour and success, though not without occasional 
cruelty, the various provinces of the West. In person, or by his 
generals, he defeated the Picts and Scots in Britain, the Saxons in 
Northern Gaul, the Franks and Alemanni upon the Rhine, and 
the Quadi upon the Danube, everywhere maintaining the frontier 
and defending it by castles and ramparts. He suppressed the 
revolt of Firmus in Africa, and re-established the Roman autho- 
rity over Numidia and Mauretania. As early as a. d. 367, 
he associated his son, Gratian, in the honours of the imperial 
dignity, but gave him no share in the government. He died at 
Bregetio on the Danube, Nov. 17, a.d. 375, when he had reigned 
between eleven and twelve years. 

27. Meanwhile^ the weaker Valens in the East, cruel, timid, and 
governed by favourites, with difficulty maintained himself upon 
the throne which he owed, not to his own merit, Valens 
but to the affection or the jealousy of his brother. a.d. 

The insurrection of Procopius had nearly brought 
his reign to an end in the year after his accession, a. d. '^,6^^ but 
was suppressed by the courage and devotion of the brave and 
unselfish Sallust. War with the Visigoths, who had embraced the 
cause of Procopius, followed, a. d. 367, and was concluded by 
a peace, a. d. 369, of which the barbarians dictated the terms. 
A campaign against Sapor, a.d. 371, had no result of importance. 
In the following year there was a conspiracy at Antioch which 
threatened the life of the Emperor. But the great event of the 
reign of Valens was the irruption of the Huns into Europe, and 
the consequent precipitation on the Roman Empire of the dis- 
possessed Goths, who, received as suppliants and fugitives, were 
in a little while driven by ill-treatment to declare themselves 
enemies, and in the two battles of Marcianople and Adrianople 
proved their superiority over the Roman armies, defeating first 
the generals of Valens, and then Valens himself, who was slain at 
Adrianople, with two-thirds of his soldiers, a.d. 378. 

That the Huns were Turanians from the steppes of Northern or Central 
Asia seems to be certain, but their exact race is a point which can never be 



536 ROME. [BOOK v. 

settled. They were probably either Mongols, Turks, or Oigurs. Their 
identity with the Hiong-nu, assumed by Gibbon, is disputable. Nothing is 
known of the causes which led to their migration ; but we have sufficient 
evidence of their appearance as a new nation, about a.d. 370, on the northern 
shores of the Black Sea, of their conquest of the Alani in the tract between 
the Wolga and the Don, and of their repeated victories over the Goths under 
Hermanric and his successor, Withimer. The Gothic kingdom of Hermanric 
had extended from the Baltic to the Black Sea, comprising South- Western 
Russia, Poland, and Eastern Prussia, and extending over various cognate tribes, 
of which the two most important were the Ostrogoths (Eastern Goths) and 
the Visigoths (Western Goths) in the tract between the Theiss and the 
Dniepr. Driven from their lands by the Huns, the Visigoths first, and the 
Ostrogoths after them, requested and obtained leave from the Romans to 
cross the Danube into Moesia. The numbers of the Visigoths alone have been 
estimated at a million. The difficulty of feeding such a multitude, and per- 
haps acts of oppression and extortion on the part of the Roman officials, led to 
the armed outbreak in which Valens lost his life. The result might have been 
different if he had waited for the forces of the West, which were marching to 
his aid at the time when he provoked an engagement. 

28. On the death of Valentinian, a. d. ^'j^j he had been suc- 
ceeded by his son, Gratian, a youth of seventeen, who immediately 
Reign of associated in the government his brother, Valen- 
Gratian, tinian II, a boy of five. Gratian, the pupil of the 
375-383. Christian poet, Ausonius, was amiable but weak. 
Valentmian II So lonff as the instructors of his youth maintained 

and Tneo- . " _ •' 

dosius I their authority over him, he conducted himself with 
associated, credit and seemed to be an excellent ruler. Gaul 
was delivered from the Alemanni under his auspices by the 
victory of Argentaria (a.d. 378); and the East, which the pre- 
cipitation of his uncle had prevented him from saving, was wisely 
placed under the superintendence of Theodosius, whom Gratian 
raised from a private station to be his colleague, a.d. 379. The 
prefecture of Illyricum was voluntarily ceded by the Western to 
the Eastern Emperor. But as advancing manhood emancipated 
Gratian from control, the natural softness and weakness of his 
character displayed itself. Unworthy favourites obtained from 
him the direction of public affairs, and cruelly abused his con- 
fidence. Hunting became his passion- and the hours which 
should have been given to business were devoted to the pleasures 
and excitement of the chase. The army was neglected and re- 
sented its treatment ; the indolent Emperor was despised j in 
a short time revolt broke out. Maximus, a Roman settled in 
Britain, was invested with the purple by the British legions, and 
passed over into Gaul, with the intention of engaging Gratian. 
But the Gallic legions refused to fight; and Gratian, quitting 



PAETi. PER. VI.] GRATIAN TO THEODOSIUS I. 537 

Paris, where he held his court, fled to Lyons, and was there over- 
taken and slain, a. d. 383. 

29. Maximus, successful thus far, obtained an acknowledgment 
of his dignity from Theodosius, on condition of his acknowledging 
in his turn the title of Valentinian II, and leaving 

him in undisturbed possession of the Italian pre- Maximus, 
fecture, which had been made over to him by his ^■'^^ 

' ■' 383-388. 

brother. But the ambition of the usurper induced him 
after a few years to break his engagement. In August, a. d. 387, 
he crossed the Alps, invaded Italy, and drove Valentinian to take 
refuge in the East. There the great Theodosius, after some hesi- 
tation, embraced the cause of his nephew, married his sister Galla_, 
and defeating Maximus in Pannonia, a. d. 388, replaced the 
young Valentinian upon the throne. 

30. Valentinian 11^ who now at the age of eighteen became for 
the second time Emperor, was amiable and weak, like his brother. 
He allowed a subject, Argobastes, a Frank by race. Second reign 
to obtain a position in the kingdom similar to that of Valen- 
occupied by the ' Mayors of the Palace ' under the a. d. 
Merovingian kings of France • and then, becoming 388-392. 
aware of his own want of authority, attempted to remove him, 
but in vain. Argobastes asserted his power, refused to lay down 
his office, and after a few days murdered his master, a. d. 392, and 
placed a creature of his own, one Eugenius, upon the throne. 

31. The new Emperor was not acknowledged by Theodosius, 
whose natural indignation at the contempt shown for his arrange- 
ments was stimulated by the prayers and tears of his 

wife, Galla, the sister of the murdered monarch. Eugenius, 
After temporizing for some months, while he col- ^•°- 

^ ^ ' 392-394. 

lected a formidable force, the Eastern Emperor 
invaded the provinces of the West, defeating his rival by the help 
of his own troops near Aquileia, and caused his head to be struck 
from his shoulders, a. d. 394. The Frank, Argobastes, became 
a fugitive, and soon afterwards terminated his life by suicide. 

32. The reign of Theodosius in the East runs Reign of 
parallel with those of Gratian, Maximus, Valen- Tif°^°^^"t/ 
tinian II, and Eugenius in the West, commencing a.d. 
A.D. 379, in the fourth year of Gratian, and ter- ifj^ubjects 
minating a. d. 395, the year after the death of the Goths. 
Eugenius. It is a reign which surprises us by its wonderful vigour. 



538 ROME. [BOOKv. 

Theodosius truly deserved the name of 'Great/ By a combination 
of patience and caution with vast military skill, he in the course 
of five years (a. d. 379 to 384) effectually reduced the hordes of 
the Visigoths to subjection, converted them from enemies into 
subjects, and was able to use their swords against his other adver- 
saries. It was no doubt an evil that these barbarians, and the 
Ostrogoths also, after their defeat in a. d. 386, were settled within 
the limits of the Empire, in Moesia, Thrace, Illyricum, and Asia 
Minor • since they were not sufficiently civilised to amalgamate 
with the other subjects of the State. But Theodosius had only 
a choice of evils. If he had not given the barbarians settlements, 
he would have driven them to despair ; and more was to be feared 
from their despair than even from their fickleness and turbulence. 
Theodosius himself kept the Goths quiet while he lived. He 
employed them with good effect against Maximus and Eugenius. 
If his successors had had his talents, the new subjects of the 
Empire might, very possibly, have been kept under control, and 
have become its strength instead of proving its weakness. 

33. The vigour of Theodosius, which was employed with such 

good effect against the Goths, and against the usurpers who 

troubled the repose of the West, found another and 

tioirof ^ more questionable vent in the regulation of the 

pagans and faith of his Subjects and in earnest and prolonged 

heretics. x o 

efforts to establish uniformity of religion. A qualified 
persecution of heathenism had beeij sanctioned by, some previous 
Emperors. Theodosius broadly forbade all exercise of the chief 
rites of the old pagan religion under the extreme penalty of death ; 
shut up or destroyed the temples; confiscated the old endow- 
ments; and made every act of the worship penal. Towards 
heretics he acted with equal decision, but with somewhat less 
harshness. The Arians and other sects condemned by the Coun- 
cils of Nice (a. D. 335) and Constantinople (a. d. 381) were com- 
pelled to relinquish their churches, vacate their sees, and make 
over their endowments to the orthodox ; they were forbidden to 
preach, to ordain ministers, and even to meet for public worship ; 
but the penalty in case of disobedience rarely went beyond a fine 
or exile, and practically the penalties were very seldom enforced. 
The administration of Theodosius was very much less severe than 
his laws ; and to judge him from his code alone would give a false 
idea of his character. 



PART I. PER. VI.] REIGN OF THEODOSIUS THE GREAT, 539 

34. Still Theodosius cannot be wholly absolved from the charge 
of violence and cruelty. His temper was capricious ; and, while 
upon some occasions he exhibited an extraordinary His clemency 
degree of clemency and gentleness under extreme ^"*^ seventy. 
provocation, as when (in a. d. 387) he pardoned the insolence of 
Antiochenes, yet on others he allowed the fury which opposition 
awoke in him to have free course, and involved the innocent and 
the guilty in one sweeping sentence of punishment. The most 
notable example of this culpable severity is to be found in the 
famous massacre of the Thessalonians, for which he was compelled 
to do penance by St. Ambrose (a. d. 390). 

35. The victory of Theodosius over the usurper, Eugenius, 
A. D. 394, had made him master of the West, and re-united for 
the last time the whole of the Roman world under ^. , ,. . 

rmal divi- 

the sceptre of a single monarch. But the union did sion of the 
not last longer than a few months. It had come to Empue. 
be an accepted principle of the Imperial policy that the weight of 
the internal administration, and the defence of the frontiers against 
the barbarians, was a burthen beyond the powers of any single 
man. From the accession of Diocletian the Roman world had 
been governed, excepting on rare occasions, by a plurality of 
princes; and it had been the usual practice to partition out the 
provinces among them. Theodosius^ therefore, had no sooner 
defeated Eugenius, than he sent for his younger son, Honorius, 
a boy of eleven, and prepared to make over to him the Western 
Empire. Soon afterwards, finding his end approaching^ he formally 
divided his dominions between his two sons, leaving Theodosius' 
the East to Arcadius^ the elder, and the West to death. 
Honorius, whom he placed under the guardianship of the general 
Stilicho. Theodosius expired at Milan in the fiftieth year of his 
age and the sixteenth of his reign, Jan. 17, a. d. 395. 

A Life of Theodosius was written in the seventeenth century by Flechier, 
Bishop of Nismes (Paris, 1679; 4to.) ; but it cannot be recommended to the 
student. A better idea of the time will be derived from the work of 

Mueller, P. E., De genio sescuH Iheodosiani. Havnise, 1798 ; 2 vols. 8vo. 



540 ROME. [book v. 



POUETH SECTION. 

History of the Western Empire from the Accession of Honorius, A. d. 395, 
to the Deposition of Romulus Augustus, A. D. 476. 

Sources, For the reign of Honorius ZosiMUS is our chief authority ; but 
his prejudiced history must be supplemented and often corrected from the 
works of the poet Claudian (ed. KoNiG, Gottingse, 1808 ; 8vo.), who is how- 
ever too eulogistic. Both for this and" for the subsequent period, the Epitome 
of Orosius, and the Chronicles of PROSPER and Marcellinus are of service. 
JORNANDES, the Gothic historian (see above, p. 513), rises in importance, as 
the history of the Goths becomes more and more closely intermixed with that 
of the Romans. The ecclesiastical historians, Socrates, Sozomen, Theo- 
DORET, &c., and the chronologers, Idatius, Isodorus, &c., have an occa- 
sional value. Other authors will be mentioned under particular heads. 

No modern writers of repute have specially treated this last and saddest 
period of the history of Rome. The student must consult Gibbon, chaps, 
xxix. to xxxviii., and Niebuhr, Lectures on the History of Rome, lectures cxxxv. 
to cxxxviii. He may also with advantage compare Milman, History of Latin 
Christianity (London, 1854 ; 5 vols. 8vo.) ; books ii. and iii. 

I. Hitherto the East and West^ if politically separate govern- 
ments, had been united by sympathy^ by the mutual lending and 
. receiving of assistance^ and by the idea^ at any rate, 
of the that in some sense they formed one Empire. With 
Western Arcadius and Honorius this idea begins to fade 
A. D. and disappear; relations of friendship between the 

governments are replaced by feelings of jealousy, 
of mutual repulsion, of suspicion, ' distrust, and dislike. Hence 
the disruption of the Empire is ordinarily dated from this time, 
though the separation was really so gradual, that the historian acts 
somewhat arbitrarily in fixing on any definite point. There is, 
however, none better than the date commonly taken ; and, as the 
Eastern or Byzantine Empire belongs confessedly to Modern and 
not to Ancient History, the fortunes of the Western Empire will 
alone be followed in this concluding section of the history of 
Ancient Rome. 

3. The origin of the estrangement between the East and West 

appears to have been the mutual jealousy and con- 
Estrangement n- A.- J • r -n r i •• /-i 

between the nicting pretensions of Rufinus, the minister of the 
East and Eastern, and Stilicho, the general and guardian of the 

West. -" 30 o 

Western Emperor. This jealousy cost Rufinus his 
life, and rendered the relations between the two states unsatisfac- 



PART I. PEE. VI.] REIGN OF HONORIUS. 541 

tory. The ill-will was brought to a head, when the Goths of Moesia 
and Thrace, having revolted under Alaric, instead of being sternly 
repressed by the Eastern Emperor, were treated with and induced 
to remove to a region from which they threatened , 

" ' Invasions of 

Italy. When Alaric was made by Arcadius master- the Goths 
general of the Eastern Illyricum, a. d. 398, it was ™'^^'" ^^^'^• 
felt at once that the West was menaced ; and the dreadful inva- 
sions which followed were ascribed^ not without some show of 
reason, to the connivance of the Emperor of the East, who to save 
his own territories had let the Goths loose upon his brother's. 
The first invasion, in a. d. 402^ carried devastation over the rich 
plains of Northern Italy, but was effectually checked by Stilicho, 
who completely defeated Alaric in the battle of Pollentia (March 
39, A.D. 403) and forced him to retire into Illyricum. The second 
invasion, a. d. 408, was more disastrous. The Empire had lost 
the services of Stilicho, who had been sacrificed to the jealousy 
of an ungrateful master. Alaric marched upon Rome, and formed 
the siege of the city, but after some months consented to spare it 
on the receipt of an enormous ransom, a. d. 409. He then sought 
to come to terms with Honorius, who had fixed his court at 
Ravenna j but, being insulted during the negotiations, he broke 
them off, once more marched on Rome, starved the city into 
submission^ and entered it as its master, a. d. 410. A puppet 
emperor was set up in the person of a certain Attalus, who was 
however after a few months again degraded by Alaric to a private 
condition. The court of Ravenna still refusing the terms of 
peace which Alaric offered, he finally, in August, a. d. 410, re- 
solved to push hostility to the utmost. Advancing a third time 
upon Rome, he took and sacked the city, overran 
Southern Italy, and made himself master of the Rome, 
whole peninsula from the walls of Ravenna to the "*"°" ^^'^' 
Sicilian sea. The Roman Empire of the West would probably 
have now come to an end, had not death overtaken the bold Goth 
in the midst of his conquests. His brother-in-law, Adolphus, who 
succeeded him, had neither his talents nor his ambition. After 
exhausting Southern Italy by plunder and ravage for the space of 
two years, he made peace with Honorius, accepted his sister, 
Placidia, in marriage, and withdrew his army from Italy into Gaul, 
A.D. 413. 

3. Nor were the sack of Rome and the devastation of Italy by 



542 ROME. [book v. 

the Goths the only calamities which afflicted the Empire during 
Other troubles. ^^'^ miserable period. The invasion of the com- 
Invasion of bined Vandals, Suevi, Burgundians, and Alani, under 
Loss of Rhadagaisus (a.d. 405), which carried fire and sword 
provinces. Qygj. ^]-^g regions between the Alps and the Arno, 
would have been regarded as a misfortune of the first magnitude, 
if it had not been thrown into the shade by the more terrible visit- 
ation of the Goths. Stilicho, indeed, with consummate general- 
ship, defeated this formidable host, slew Rhadagaisus, and forced 
the remainder of his army to retire. Italy^ after suffering ravage 
through its whole extent from the wild and savage hordes of Sar- 
matia and Germany, was by the year a.d. 413 cleared of all its 
invaders, and was once more ruled in peace by the son of Theo- 
dosius. But, if no worse calamity than utter exhaustion was 
inflicted on the centre of the Empire, a sadder fate began to 
overtake the extremities, from which Rome withdrew her pro- 
tection, or which were torn from her by the barbarians. The 
remnant of the host of Rhadagaisus, Vandals, Burgundians^ and 
others, after quitting Italy, passed into Gaul (a.d. 406), overran 
the region between the Rhine and the Pyrenees, and took pos- 
session of a broad tract which became known as * Burgundy.' 
Passing thence into Spain, they carried all before them, spreading 
themselves over the entire peninsula from the Pyrenees to the 
straits of Gibraltar. In Southern Gaul and Spain they were shortly 
followed by the Goths, who, under Adolphus, crossed the moun- 
tains, drove the Vandals into Gallicia and Bsetica (thence called 
FandalusicL or Andalusia)^ and established in Spain and Aquitaine 
the 'Kingdom of the Visigoths,' which, although for a time (a.d. 
414 to 41 8) nominally subject to Rome, became under Theodoric I 
(a.d. 418) completely independent. About the same time Britain 
was finally cut adrift from the Empire. In Gaul the Franks fol- 
lowed the example of the Burgundians, and, crossing the Lower 
Rhine, established themselves in the region about Cologne and 
Treves. Thus almost the whole of the prefectura Galliarum passed 
out of the hands of the Romans, who retained nothing west of the 
Alps but the province of Gallia Lugdunensis. 

4. It is not surprising that during this troublous period Honorius 

Revolts and found his right to the throne disputed by preten- 

usurpations. ders. Besides Attains (see § 2), there arose in Africa 

a Moorish usurper^ named Gildo, who assumed the government 



PART I. PER. VI.] HONORIUS TO VALENTINIAN III. 543 

of the ' Five Provinces/ a.d. 398, but was defeated by the Romans 
under Mascezel, Gildo's brother. In Britain a Constantine was 
proclaimed Emperor, a.d. 407, who associated on the throne his son, 
Constans, and extended his dominion at one time (a.d. 408 to 409) 
over the greater portion of Gaul and Spain ; but after the revolt of 
his general, Gerontius, in the last-named province, he was defeated 
and put to death by Constantius, one of Honorius' commanders, 
A.D. 411. A second revolt occurred in Africa under Count Hera- 
clian, A.D. 413. Assuming the purple _, he ventured to invade 
Italy, but was defeated in the neighbourhood of Rome, and, on 
returning to his province, was put to death by his indignant sub- 
jects. After the death of Constantine, the sovereignty of Roman 
Gaul was assumed by Jovinus, a.d. 412, who associated on the 
tlirone his brother, Sebastian ; but these usurpers were easily put 
down by the Gothic leader, Adolphus, a.d. 413. The latter years 
of Honorius (a.d. 413 to 423) were free from troubles of this kind. 
The weak prince strengthened himself by marrying his sister, 
Placidia, the widow of the Gothic chief, Adolphus, to Constantius, 
his successful general, and associating the latter in the govern- 
ment, A.D. 421. Constantius, however, reigned only seven months, 
and he was soon followed to the tomb by his unhappy colleague, 
who died of a dropsy, Aug. 27, a.d. 423, without making any 
arrangements for the succession. 

5. The vacant throne was seized by John, principal secretary of 
the late Emperor ; but Theodosius II, who had succeeded his 
father, Arcadius, in the Empire of the East, refused 

to acknowledge the usurper, and claimed the throne the Secretary,' 
for his infant nephew, Valentinian, the son of Con- ^•°- 

^ ' ' 423-425. 

stantius and Placidia. A naval and military expe- 
dition, which he sent to Italy, was at first unsuccessful ; but, 
after a while, signs of disaffection appeared among the Italian 
soldiers, who preferred a monarch descended from the great Theo- 
dosius to an unknown upstart. Treachery opened the gates of 
Ravenna to the Eastern army, and John, delivered into the hands 
of his enemies, was beheaded at Aquileia, a. d. 425. 

6. The nephew of Honorius, who was now raised to the throne, 
was a child of no more than six years of age. He 

was therefore placed under the guardianship of his ^^^P) °^ 
mother, Placidia, who administered the Empire from a.d. 

a.d. 425 to 450. The government of an infant and a "* 



544 ROME. [book v. 

woman was ill suited for a kingdom placed in desperate circum- 
stances, and precipitated the ruin which had long been visibly 
impending. The jealousy felt by the general, Aetius, towards 
Boniface, Count of Africa, and the unworthy treatment of the 
latter, drove him into rebellion, induced him to invite over the 
Vandals from Spain, a.d. 438, and led to the loss of the African 
diocese, and the establishment of a Vandal kingdom in that region 
by the renowned Genseric, a.d. 429 to 439. Family arrange- 
ments connected with the betrothment of Valentinian to Eudoxia, 
daughter of Theodosius II, had even before this (a.d. 425) detached 
from the West and made over to the East the provinces of Pan- 
nonia, Noricum_, and Dalmatia. Excepting for some precarious 
possessions in Gaul and Spain, the Western Empire was now con- 
fined to the three countries of Vindelicia, Rhsetia, and Italy. The 
sword of Aetius maintained with tolerable success the dimensions 
of Roman Gaul against the attacks, from opposite sides, of the 
Visigoths and the Franks, a.d. 435 to 4^0 j but his contest with 
the latter brought into the field a new foe, the terrible Attila, 
king of the Huns, who, professing to embrace the cause of a fugi- 
tive Frankish king, crossed the Rhine into Gaul at the head of a 
vast army, and spread devastation far and wide over the country. 
The Romans and Visigoths were forced into a temporary alliance, 
and united their arms against the Scyth. On the field of Chalons 
the question was tried and determined (a.d. 451), whether the 
predominance of power in Western Europe was to fall to the 
Tatars or to the Teutons, to a savage race, heathen, anarchical, 
and destructive, or to one which had embraced Christianity, which 
had aptitudes for organisation and law, and could construct as well 
as destroy. The decision was, fortunately, in favour of the Teu- 
tons. Attila retreated beyond the Rhine; and, although in a.d. 
453 he endeavoured to retrieve his failure, invading Italy, and 
spreading desolation over the whole plain of the Po, yet it was 
only to retreat once more to his palace in the wilds of Hungary. 
The year following, a.d. 453, he burst a blood-vessel, and died 
suddenly ; and the West was delivered from all peril of becoming 
the prey of Tatar hordes. Two years later, Valentinian also lost 
his life, being murdered, a. d. 455, by Maximus, whose wife he 
had dishonoured, and the retainers of Aetius, whom, on grounds of 
suspicion, he had executed. 



PART I. PER. VI.] MAXIMUS AND A VITUS. 545 

The history of Attila has engaged the pens of several able writers. Among 
them may be noticed 

Mueller, J., Attila, der Held des funften Jahrhunderts. Leipzig, 1806 ; 8vo. 

KleMM, G. F., Attila nach der Geschichte, Sage, und Legende dargestellt. 
Berlin, 1827 ; 8vo. 

Herbert, Dean, Attila, King of the Hwjs : a Poem. London, 1838; 8vo. 
The Notes to this work are elaborate and highly valuable. 

7. Maximus, the murderer of Valentinian III, succeeded him as 
Emperor, but reigned less than three months (March 16 to June 12, 
A.D. 455). Anxious to strengthen his hold upon the 

throne by connecting himself with the royal house of Maximus, 
Theodosius, he married his son, Palladius, to theMa'r.i6tojunei2, 

' ' -^ A.D. 455. 

daughter of Valentinian, and forced Eudoxia, Valen- 
tinian's widow, and daughter of Theodosius II, to become his 
wife. The outraged matron implored the aid of Genseric, whose 
fleet commanded the Mediterranean j and the bold Vandal_, greedy 
after the spoil of Italy, readily responded to her call. His landing 
at Ostia was the signal for the Romans to rise against their sove- 
reign, in whom they saw the author of their calamities j but the 
murder of the Roman Emperor failed to propitiate the Vandalic 
king, whose mind was intent upon plunder. Despite Rome 
the intercession of Pope Leo, Genseric entered Rome plundered by 
with his troops^ and gave it up to them to pillage for 
fourteen days. Whatever Attila had left, was now carried off. 
Eudoxia and her two daughters were made prisoners and borne 
away to Carthage. Even the churches were not spared. All that 
yet remained in Rome of public or private wealth, of sacred or 
profane treasure, was transported to the vessels of Genseric, and 
removed to Africa. 

8. This terrible calamity so paralysed the Romans, that they 
appointed no Emperor in the place of Maximus. When, however, 
the news that the throne was vacant reached Gaul, 

Avitus, the commander of the legions there, induced Avitus, 
his soldiers to proclaim him: and, as he was sup- ,,.t'^'r. 

^ ' ' ^ 455-450. 

ported by the Visigoths of Western Caul and Spain, 
Rome and Italy for a brief space acknowledged him as their sove- 
reign. But Italian pride chafed against the imposition of a mon- 
arch from without ; and Count Ricimer, a Goth, who commanded 
the foreign troops in the pay of Rome, disliked the rule of an 
Emperor in whose appointment he had had no hand. Avitus was 
therefore required to abdicate_, after he had held the throne a little 
more than a year j he consented, and, laying aside the Imperial 

N n 



546 ROME, [BOOK V- 

office, became Bishop of Placentia, but died within a few months 
of his abdication^ whether by disease or violence is uncertain. 

9. It was evidently the wish of Count Ricimer to assume the 
crown which he had forced Avitus to resign j but he saw that 

Interiegnum, Roni^ was not yet prepared to submit herself to 
Reign of the rule of a barbarian, and he therefore, after 
A°D.^"' an interval of six months, placed an Emperor on 
457-461, the throne in the person of Majorian, who ruled 
well for four years^ from a.d. 457 to 46 j. Majorian, who was a 
man of talent and character, addressed himself especially to the 
struggle with the Vandals of Africa, whose constant depredations 
deprived Italy of repose. Not content with chastising the dis- 
orderly bands which ravaged his coasts, he prepared to invade the 
territory of Genseric with a fleet and army. These were collected 
at the Spanish port of Carthagena • but the emissaries of Genseric 
secretly destroyed the fleet ; and Majorian, having returned to 
Italy, was, like Avitus, forced to abdicate. Count Ricimer being 
jealous of his protege^ and desirous of appointing an Emperor of 
inferior ability. 

10. The Imperial title and ensigns were now conferred on a 
puppet named Severus, who served as a convenient screen, behind 

which Couut Ricimer concealed the authority which 
Ricimer, he himself really wielded. But Severus dying at the 
461^67 ^^^ °^ ^^^'^ years, a.d. 465, Ricimer at length felt 
Severus himself sufficiently strong to take openly the sole 
EmperOT from ^nd entire direction of the affairs of Italy. He 
■A^-D- respected Roman prejudices, however, so far as to 

abstain from the assumption of the Imperial name. 
His position was a difficult one, for the Emperor of the East 
looked coldly on him, while he was exposed to constant attack 
from the powerful fleets of Genseric and Marcellinus, the sove- 
reigns of Africa and Dalmatia, and had further to fear the hostility 
of ^Egidius, Roman commander in Gaul, who refused to acknow- 
ledge his authority. The peril of his situation compelled him, two 
years after the death of Severus, a.d. 467, to apply for aid to the 
Eastern Emperor, Leo, and to accept the terms on which that 
prince was willing to succour him. The terms were galling to 
his pride. Italy was required by Leo to submit to a sovereign of 
his choice, which fell on Anthemius, a Byzantine nobleman of 
distinction, 



PAKTi. PEE. VI.] MAJORIAN TO AUGUSTULUS. 547 

II. The establishment of Anthemius as ^Emperor of the West' 
was followed by a serious effort against the terrible Vandals, who 
were now the enemy from whom Italy suffered the 
most. Alliance was made between Leo, Anthemius, Anthemius, 
and Marcellinus : and while the Dalmatian fleet pro- ^- °- 

' ^ 467-472. 

tected Italy and retook Sardinia, two great expedi- 
tions were directed by the Eastern Emperor upon Carthage, a.d. 
468. One of these, starting from Egypt, attacked Tripoli, sur- 
prised the cities of that province, and proceeded along the coast 
westward. The other, which consisted of 1,113 ships, having on 
board 100,000 men, was directed upon Cape Bona, about forty 
miles from Carthage, and should at once have laid siege to the 
town. But Basiliscus, the commander, allowed himself to be 
amused by negotiations while the cunning Genseric made prepa- 
rations for the destruction of the fleet, which he accomplished by 
means of fire-ships, thus entirely frustrating the attack. The rem- 
nant of the expedition withdrew- Genseric recovered Sardinia, 
and shortly afterwards established his power over Sicily, thus ob- 
taining a position from which he menaced Italy more than ever 
before. But the ^ Empire," as it was still called, was to be sub- 
verted, not by its external, but its internal foes. Though Ricimer 
had consented to the nomination of Anthemius as Emperor, and 
had bound himself to his cause by accepting his daughter in 
marriage, yet it was not long before discord and jealousy separated 
the professed friends. As Anthemius had fixed his court at Rome, 
Ricimer retired to Milan, whence he could readily correspond with 
the barbarians of Spain, Gaul and Pannonia. Having collected 
a considerable army, he marched to the gates of Rome, proclaimed 
Olybrius^ the husband of Placidia (youngest daughter of Valen- 
tinian III), Emperor, and, forcing his way into the city, slew 
Anthemius, and established Olybrius upon the throne (July 11, 

A.D. 472). 

13. The Western Empire had now, in the space of sixteen 
years, experienced the rule of six different sovereigns. In the 
four years of continued existence which still re- Reigns of 
mained to it, four other ' Emperors ' were about to Olybrius, 

Glycerius 

hold the sceptre. The first of these, Olybrius, re- Nepos, and 
tained his authority for little more than three months, Romulus 

•' •^ Augustus, 

ascending the throne, July 1 1, and dying by a natural a.d. 

death, Oct. 23. The chief event of his reign was 472-476. 

N n 2 



548 ROME. [BOOK v. 

the death of Count Ricimer, who expired forty days after his 
capture of Rome, August 30, leaving the command of his army to 
his nephew, Gundobald, a Burgundian. Gundobald gave the purple, 
in A.D. 473, to Glycerius, an obscure soldier j but the Eastern 
Emperor, Leo, interposed for the second time, and assigned the 
throne to Julius Nepos, the nephew of Marcellinus, and his suc- 
cessor in the sovereignty of Dalmatia. Nepos easily prevailed 
over Glycerius, who exchanged his Imperial dignity, a.d. 47^, for 
the bishopric of Salona ; but the new Emperor was scarcely settled 
upon the throne, when the barbarian mercenaries, who were now 
all-powerful in Italy, revolted under the patrician, Orestes, a.d. 
475, and invested with the purple his son, Romulus Augustus, 
called, by way of contempt, ' Augustulus.' Augustulus, the last of 
the Western Emperors, reigned less than a year (Oct. 31, a.d. 475 
to Aug. 33, A.D. 476). The mercenaries, shortly after his acces- 
sion, demanded one-third of the lands of Italy, and, when their 
demand was refused, took arms under the dommand of their Ger- 
man chief, Odoacer, slew Orestes, the Emperor's father, and de- 
prived Augustulus of his sovereignty. The dignity of Emperor of 
the West was then formally abolished j and Odoacer ascended the 
throne as the first barbarian ' King of Italy.' 

13. The history of the Western Roman Empire here terminates. 

The Empire had endured 507 years (b.c. 31 to a.d. 476), under 

seventy-seven princes. Attaining its greatest mag- 

the Empire, tiitude in the reign pf Trajan, when it extended 

Causes of its fj-Qm the Pillars of Hercules and the Friths of Forth 

decline and fall. , ,^, , i «^ t i -r» • r^ ^r • 

and Clyde to the Caspian and the Persian Gulf, it 
had gradually broken up and contracted its limits, until it had 
come to be almost confined to Italy. Its ruin had been caused, 
partly by internal decay, but mainly through the repeated invasions 
of vast hordes of barbarians. Goths, Vandals, Huns, Burgundians, 
Suevi, Alani, Alemanni, Franks, Heruli had precipitated them- 
selves in a ceaseless succession on the regions which Roman civi- 
lisation had turned into gardens, and poured in a resistless 
torrent over province after province. The force of the attack 
fell mainly upon the West, After the first rush of the Goths 
across the Lower Danube, in the time of Valens, the tide of migra- 
tion took wholly a westerly course. Pannonia, Spain, Africa, most 
of Gaul, were occupied by the invaders. Italy attracted each more 
powerful spoiler, and host after host desolated its fertile plains. 



PART II.] PARJHIA. 549 

Rome herself was taken repeatedly, and was sacked twice, by 
Alaric and by Genseric. She felt that she needed all her resources 
for her own defence, and was therefore obliged to relinquish such 
outlying provinces as no foe had captured. Hence, Britain, parts 
of Gaul, Vindelicia, and probably Rhaetia, were abandoned : Pan- 
nonia, Noricum, and Dalmatia were parted with ; at last, nothing 
remained but Italy; and Italy could not undertake to defend 
herself. Her rulers had long ceased to put any trust in Italian 
soldiers, and had drawn their recruits from the outlying provinces 
rather than from the heart of the Empire, Finally, they had 
thought it excellent strategy to take the barbarians themselves 
into pay, and to fight Huns with Goths, and Goths with Burgun- 
dians or Vandals. But this policy at last proved fatal. The bar- 
barians, perceiving their strength, determined to exert it, and to 
have Italy for themselves. It was more pleasant to be masters 
than servants. The Imperial power had in fact been long existing 
upon sufferance ; the edifice was without due support, and it only 
needed the touch of a finger to make it fall. What Odoacer did, 
Ricimer might have done with as much ease ; but the facility of 
an enterprise is not always apparent beforehand. 



PART II. HISTORY OF PARTHIA. 



Geographical Outline of the Parthian Empire. 

I. The Parthian Empire at its greatest extent comprised the 
countries between the Euphrates and the Indus, reaching north- 
wards as far as the Araxes, the Caspian and the Extent of the 
Lower Oxus, and southwards to the Persian Gulf and Empire, 
the Indian Ocean. It thus covered, in the main, the same ground 
with the Persian Empire of Cyrus and with the original kingdom 
of the Seleucidae ; but it was less extensive than either of those 
great monarchies. It did not include Syria, or Phoenicia, or 
Palestine, or Armenia, or any portion of Asia Minor ; nor does 
it seem to have comprised the valley of the Upper Oxus, much less 
that of the Jaxartes. Its greatest length, between the Euphrates and 



550 PARTHIA. [book v. 

the Indus, may be estimated at about one thousand nine hundred 
miles, while its greatest width, between the Lower Oxus and the 
Indian Ocean, may have equalled, or a little exceeded^ a thousand 
miles. Its area cannot have fallen much short of a million of 
square miles. 

2. But of this vast space a very large proportion was scarcely 
habitable. The Mesopotamian, Persian^ Kharesmian, Gedrosian, 

, and Carmanian Deserts occupy at least one half of 

Large area -^ ■' 

occupied by the region between the Euphrates and the Indus ; 
^^^^^^' and, though not absolutely incapable of supporting 
human life, these tracts can at the best sustain a very sparse and 
scanty population. Such possessions add but little to the strength 
of the empire which comprises them^ and thus may be omitted 
from consideration when we seek to form an estimate of its power 
and resources. About half a million of square miles remain when 
we have deducted the deserts j an area only one-third of that of 
Rome (see p. 453), but still very much larger than that of any 
modern European state excepting Russia. 

3. The Parthian Empire was, like most others, divided into pro- 
vinces. Of these the most important were, in the west, Mesopo- 

Division into tamia and Babylonia ; in the mid region, Atro- 
provinces. patene^ Media, Assyria, Susiana, and Persia ; towards 
the east, Parthyene or Parthia Proper, Hyrcania, Margiana, Aria, 
Zarangia, Carmania, Sacastane, Arachosia, and Gedrosia. Other 
minor divisions were Chalonitis, Cambadene, Mesene, Rhagiana, 
Choarene, Comisene, Artacene, Apavarcticene, Sec. It will be 
observed that the main provinces were for the most part identical, 
in name at any rate, with provinces of the old Persian Empire, 
already described in this work (see pp. 17-21). As, however, 
even in provinces of this class certain changes have often to be 
noted in respect of boundaries, or principal towns, it seems best 
to run briefly through the entire list. 

i. Mesopotamia. The name of Mesopotamia was applied by the 

Parthians, not to the whole region between the Tigris and 

Euphrates rivers, but only to the upper portion of 
Mesopotamia. .^ , , 1 , , , , , , , 

It — the tract bounded on the north by the Mons 

Masius, and on the south by a canal uniting the two streams 

a little above the 33rd parallel. Its chief cities were Anthe- 

musia, Nicephorium, Carrhae, Europus, Nisibis, and Hatra. 

ii. Babylonia lay below Mesopotamia, extending to the con- 



PAKT 11.] GEOGRAPHICAL OUTLINE. 551 

fluence of the Euphrates and Tigris, and including a tract of 
considerable size and importance on the right bank 
of the former river. Its chief towns were Seleuceia 
on the Tigris, Babylon, Borsippa, and Vologesia. 

iii. Mesine, called also Characene, was the tract below Baby- 
lonia, reaching to the shores of the Persian Gulf. Its capital was 
Charax Spasini, at the confluence, probably, of the 
Kuran with the Euphrates. The only other city 
of any importance was Teredon or Diridotis, on the Gulf, at the 
mouth of the Euphrates. Mesene was famous for its thick groves 
of palm-trees. 

iv. Suslana had nearly its old boundaries and dimensions (see 
above, pp. 20, 21). Its chief cities were Susa and Badaca. 

V. Assyria, according to the nomenclature of the Parthian period, 
designated a tract which lay wholly to the east of the Tigris, 
extending from Armenia on the north to Susiana on 
the south, and interposed between Mesopotamia and ssyna. 

Media Magna. It was divided into numerous districts, among 
which the most important were Cordyene (the country of the 
Kurds) in the north, Adiabene, the tract about the two Zab rivers, 
Arbelitis, the region about Arbela, Chalonitis, the country about 
Holwan, and Apolloniatis or Sittacene, the tract upon the lower 
course of the Diyaleh river. In this district was situated Ctesiphon, 
the capital of the whole Empire. Other important towns were 
Arbela, the capital of Arbelitis, Apollonia_, the old capital of 
Apolloniatis, and Artemita^ in the same region, which became 
under the Parthians, Chalasar. 

vi. Atropatene lay between the northern part of Assyria (Cor- 
dyene) and the western shore of the Caspian, thus corresponding 
nearly to the modern Azerbijan. Its chief city was 
Gaza or Gazaca (afterwards Canzaca), now Tahkt-i- 'opa- ene. 
Suleiman. Atropatene was not so absolutely a part of the Parthian 
Empire as most of the other provinces. It was a fief over which 
the Parthian monarch claimed a sort of feudal supremacy; but 
was governed by its own princes, who were sometimes not even 
appointed by the Parthian king. 

vii. Media lay south and south-east of Atropatene, extending 
from the Kizil Uzen and the Caspian on the north, 
to about the 32nd parallel towards the south, where 
it adjoined on Susiana and Persia. It contained several districts. 



552 PARTHIA. [book v. 

of which the chief were Media Inferior, Media Superior, Cam- 
badene, and Rhagiana. The chief towns were Ecbatana (now 
Hamadan), Bagistana (Behistun), Concobar (Kungawur), Aspadana 
(Isfahan), Rhages or Europus (Kaleh Erij), and Charax. 

viii. 'Persia^ like Susiana, retained its old dimensions and boun- 
daries, except that it had ceased to be regarded as comprising 
Carmania, which was reckoned a distinct country. 

i GrS13. 

After the destruction of Persepolis by Alexander, 
Pasargadge seems to have been the chief city. 

ix. Carmania adjoined Persia upon the east. It extended from 
the Persian Gulf to about the q^rd parallel, thus 

Carmania. ^^ ^ ^ 

including a large portion of the desert of Iran. The 

chief town was Carmana (now Kerman). 

x. Parthyene^ or Parthia Proper, lay north of Carmania and west 

of Media Magna. It comprised the old country of the name, 

^ , . together with most of the desert which in early times 

Parthia. *=" •' 

was known as Sagartia. (See p. i8.) Among its 
subdivisions were Choarene, Comisene, Artacene, Tabiene, &c. 
The capital city was Hecatompylus. Other important towns were 
Apameia in Choarene, near the Caspian Gates, and Parthaunisa, 
or Nisaea (Nishapur). 

xi. Hyrcania was north of Parthia, being the tract at the south 
eastern corner of the Caspian, along the course of the river 

Gurgan. Its chief cities were Syrinx, Tape, on the 

Hyrcania. ,^,^. ^ , , , ,• 

shore of the Caspian, Carta (perhaps the earlier 
Zadracarta), Talabroce^ and Samariane. 

xii. Margiana was situated east and north-east of Parthia and 
Hyrcania, in the low plain between the Elburz range and the 

Sea of Aral. It lay along the course of the river 

Margiana. _, , ^ \ , , n-n !•• 

Margus (now the Murg-ab). The only city in 
Parthian times was Antiocheia (Merv.?). 

xiii. Aria included the district which bore the same name under 
the Persians (see p. 1 8), but comprised also the tract between Herat 

and the Hamoon or Sea of Seistan. Its chief city 

Ana. 

was Artacoana (Herat). Other towns of some con- 
sequence were Phra (Furrah), Gari (Girisk), and Bis (Bist). 

xiv. Zarangta^ or Drangiana, had come to be used in a narrower 

acceptation than the ancient one. (See p. 19.) It 

was now only a small tract close upon the Hamoon, 

the district upon the Haroot-rud and Furrah-rud being reckoned to 



PART II. PER. I.] SOURCES OF THE HISTORY. 553 

Aria, and that on the Lower Helmend being separated off, and 
forming the new province of Sacastane. The chief town of 
Zarangia was Prophthasia. 

XV. Sacastane lay south of Zarangia, corresponding to the Segestan 
of the Arabian geographers, which is now known as Seistan. Its 
chief cities were Sigal and Alexandropolis. Saca- 
stane (i. e. the land of Sacse) had probably been occu- 
pied by a colony of Scyths in the interval between Alexander's 
conquests and the formation of the Parthian Empire. 

xvi. Arachosia (or 'White India,' as the Parthians called it) 
seems to have been identical with the country known by the same 
name to the Persians. (See p. 18.) It lay east of 
Sacastane, and corresponded nearly with the modern 
Kandahar. The capital was Alexandropolis, on the Arachotus 
(Arghand-ab). Its other chief cities were Demetrias, Pharsana, 
and Parabeste. 

xvii. Gedrosia retained in the main its ancient limits, which 
were nearly those of the modern Beluchistan (see 
p, 19). It was^ however^ perhaps somewhat en- 
croached upon towards the north by Sacastane. The province lay 
south of this tract and of Arachosia and east of Carmania. 



HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE PARTHIAN EMPIRE. 

FIRST PERIOD. 

Fro?7i ihe Foundation of the Kingdom, about B.C. 255, to the Creation of 
the Empire by Mithridates or Arsaces VI, about B.C. 174. 

Sources. The sources for the history of Parthia are scanty and scattered. 
Of native sources, we possess only a very incomplete series of coins, generally 
without dates and without the special name of the king ; and a few mutilated 
inscriptions. No classical author, so far as we know, ever treated of the 
history of Parthia as a whole ; and few ever made Parthian history, in any of 
its portions, even a special subject of attention. Arrian's Parthica was 
a mere account of the Parthian War of Trajan, written from a Roman point 
of view ; and of this work there only remain about twenty short fragments. 
(See the fragments collected in C. Muller's Fragmenta Hist. Grcecorum, 
vol. iii, pp. 586-591). Strabo's account of the Parthian manners and customs 
in the sixth book of his Historical Memoirs, and the second book of his Continua- 
tion ofPolybius would have been most interesting ; but these works have wholly 
perished. The extant writer who tells us most about the Parthians is Justin ; 
but this careless historian has most imperfectly reported his authority, Trogus 
PoMPEius, and needs perpetual con-ection. For the earlier history we are 



554 PARTHIA. [book v. 

reduced to scattered notices in Strabo, Arrian, Justin, Polybius, Lucian, 
and PhleGON of Tralles; for the middle portion, from the time of 
Phraates III to Vonones I, we have Appian in his Mithridatka and Syriaca, 
Justin, Plutarch in his Li'ves of Lucullus, Pompey, Crassus, and 
Antony, JosepHUS in his Antiquitates Judaicm, and DiO Cassius (bks. xxxv- 
Iv.) ; for the later history, from Vonones to the destruction of the monarchy, 
our authorities are Tacitus in his Annals, Josephus, Suetonius, Hero- 
DIAN, the Historice Augusta Scriptores, and, above all, Dio (bks. Ivi.-lxxviii.). 

Modern works treating specially on the subject of Parthian history are not 
very numerous. The best are the following : — 

Foy-Vaillant, J., Arsacidarum Imperium, si-ve Regum Parthorum Historia 
adjidem numismatum accommodata. Parisiis, 1725 ; 4to. 

Du Four de Longuerue, Annaks Arsacidarum. Argentorat., 1732 ; 4to. 

RiCHTER, C. F., Historisch-kritischer Versuch iiber die Arsaciden und Sassa- 
niden-Dynastien. Gottingen, 1804 ; 8vo. 

TycHSEN, T. C, Comment ationes de nummis Persarum et Arsacidarum, pub- 
lished in the Commentationes novce Societat. Scient. Gotting., vols. i. and iii. 

Abstracts of the history are given in Dr. Smith's Dictionary of Greek and 
Roman Biography, sub voc. Arsacid^, and by Mr. Clinton in his Fasti 
Romani. Oxford, 1845-50; 2 vols. 4to. (See vol. ii. pp. 243-250). 

I. Parthia^ which, in the earlier times of the Persian monarchy, 

formed a portion only of a large satrapy extending from the Iranic 

Foundation desert to the Jaxartes, and from the Caspian to Samar- 

of the cand, appears towards the close of the Persian period 

kingdom . ^ • ^r , • 1 1 

about to have constituted a satrapy by itself (or with the 
B.C. 255. mere addition of Hyrcania), in which condition it 
was continued by the successors of Alexander. Tranquillity was 
preserved till about b. c. 2^^^ when the weakness of Antiochus 
Theus, and the success of the Bactrian rebellion (see p. 305), 
encouraged the Parthians to rise against their Greek masters, and 
to declare themselves an independent people. Their leader in 
the revolt was a certain Arsaces. This person was the commander 
of a body of Scythian Dahse from the banks of the Ochus, who 
migrated into Parthia, and obtaining the ascendancy in the 
country, raised their general to the position of King. There was, 
probably, sufficient affinity between the immigrant Dahae and the 
previous inhabitants of the region for the two races readily to 
coalesce; both appear to have been Turanian; and the Dahae 
were so completely absorbed that we hear nothing of them in the 
subsequent history. The names of ' Parthia ' and ' Parthian ' pre- 
vailed J and the whole nation presents to us one uniform type. 
z. This type is one of a low and coarse character. The 
Character of manners of the Parthians, even at the height of their 
the people, power, had a tinge of Tatar barbarism. Their 
mimetic art was rude, compared, not only with that of the Greeks, 



PABT 11. PER. I.] EARLY KINGS. 555 

but even of the Persians. In their architecture they imitated the 
heavy and massive constructions of the Babylonians. Their ap- 
pearance was repulsive. They were treacherous in war, indolent 
and unrefined in peace. Still they possessed qualities which fitted 
them to become a ruling nation. They were brave, enterprising, 
and fond of war ; while they had also a certain talent for organi- 
sation and administration. They are not ill-represented by the 
modern Turks^ who are allied to them in race, and rule over some 
of the same countries. 

3. Arsaces, the first king, reigned^ we are told, only two years, 
probably from b. c. i^^ to 1^'^. He occupied himself chiefly in 
consolidating his dominion over the Parthians them- 
selves, many of whom resisted his authority. Anti- Arsaces°I, 
ochus Theus, whose rule he had subverted, seems to ^^°^^t ^- <^- 

' ' 255-253. 

have made no eflFort to recover his hold on Parthia, 

being too much engaged in his war with Ptolemy Philadelphus. 

(See above, p. 222.) Arsaces, however, appears to have fallen in 

battle. 

4. The first Arsaces was succeeded by his brother, Teridates, 
who had assisted him in his original revolt. He took the title of 
Arsaces after his brother's death ; and the practice j^^j ^f 
thus begun passed into a custom, which continued Arsaces il 

1 , ^ , T^ • r^ . ^ (Teridates I), 

to the very close of the Empire. Teridates, or about b. c. 
Arsaces 11^ reigned thirty-seven years, from b. c. i^'^ 253-216. 
to 3 1 5. He made himself master of Hyrcania_, probably about 
B. c. 240, thereby drawing upon himself the hostility both of 
Seleucus Callinicus, whom he deprived of a province, and of 
Diodotus I of Bactria, who became alarmed at the increasing 
power of his neighbour. Callinicus and Diodotus, accordingly, 
made common cause; and the former led an expedition against 
Teridates, b. c. 237, which alarmed him so that at first he fled 
from Parthia into Scythia. Diodotus I^ however, dying and being 
succeeded by his son, Diodotus II, Teridates found a means of 
breaking up the alliance, and drew over the Bactrian prince to 
his side, A great battle followed ; and, Callinicus being signally 
defeated, Parthian independence was regarded as at length fully 
established. 

In Justin's Epitome of the History of Trogus Pompeius the acts of the first 
and second Arsaces are assigned to a single monarch. He is to be corrected 
from Syncellus who followed Arrian. 



556 PARTHIA. [book v. 

5. Teridates was succeeded by a son, whose real name is 
unknown, but who reigned as Arsaces III. Pursuing the aggres- 
sive policy of his father, he overran Eastern Media, 

Arsaces III, a^^d threatened to conquer the entire province, about 
about B.C. g (^^ 2j^^ Antiochus the Great, upon this, marched 
against him (b. c. 213), drove his troops from Media, 
took hiscapital^ Hecatompylus, and pursuing him into Hyrcania, 
there brought him to an engagement, the issue of which was 
doubtful. Arsaces greatly distinguished himself; and the Syrian 
monarch, finding the conquest of the new kingdom impossible, 
came to terms with his foe, confirming him in the possession of 
both Parthia and Hyrcania^ but probably requiring him to furnish 
a contingent to his projected Eastern expedition, b. c. 306. It is 
uncertain how long Arsaces III lived after this ; but the best 
authorities assign him a reign of about twenty years — from b. c. 
116 to 196. 

6. Priapatius (Arsaces IV) now becariie king, and reigned for 
fifteen years — from about B.C. 196 to 181. He appears to have been 

Reign of ^.n unwarlike prince, and to have been (Content with 
Priapatius maintaining, without any attempt to extend, his 

(^ArsacGs IV), . . , n -x 

about B. c. dominions. The Bactrian monarchs of this period 
196-181. were aggressive and powerful (see p. 307), which 

may in part account for this pause in the Parthian conquests. 

Priapatius left two sons, Phraates and Mithridates, the former of 

whom succeeded him. 

7. Phraates I (Arsaces V) had a short reign, probably from 
about B.C. 181 to 174. Nothing is known of him excepting that 

Reign of ^^ extended his dominions by the conquest of the 
Phraates I Mardi, One of the most powerful tribes of the El- 

(Arsaces V), 1111 1 .1 1 1 ^ 1 • 

about B.C. burz, and, though he had many children, left his 
181-174. crown to his brother, Mithridates, whom he regarded 
as peculiarly fitted for the kingly office. Mithridates justified this 
opinion by the extensive conquests of which an account will be 
given in the next section. He transformed the small kingdom 
which he received from Phraates into a vast and flourishing 
Empire_, and established the governmental system on which that 
Emj ire was thenceforth administered. 



PAKT II. PEK. II.] FOUNDATION OF THE EMPIRE. 557 



SECOND PERIOD. 

From the Foundation of the Empire by Mithridates I, about B.C. 174, to the 
Commencement of the Wars with the Romans, B.C. 54. 

I. The Parthian dominion had hitherto been confined to a com- 
paratively narrow territory between the Caspian Gates on the one 
hand and the districts of Aria (Herat) and Margiana Reign of 
(Merv) upon the other. The neighbouring Bactria, Mithridates I 
With its Greek princes (see pp. 306, 307), and its about b.c. 
semi-Greek civilisation, had been a far more power- 174-136. 
ful state, and had probably acted as a constant check upon the aspira- 
tions of its weaker sister. Conscious of their weakness, the Parthian 
monarchs had cultivated good relations with the Bactrians ; and, 
so far as appears, no war had hitherto broken out between the 
conterminous powers. But with the accession of Mithridates I 
(Arsaces VI) this state of things came to an end. The Bactrian 
princes were about this time directing their arms towards the 
East, bent on establishing their authority in AfFghanistan and 
North-Western India. It would seem that while their main 
strength was employed in this quarter, the provinces nearer home 
were left without adequate defence, and tempted the cupidity of 
the Parthians. Mithridates I, who was contemporary with Eucra- 
tides of Bactria, began aggressions on the Bactrian kingdom, prob- 
ably soon after his accession. Success attended his efforts, and 
he deprived Eucratides of at least two provinces. A few years 
later, on the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, b.c. 164, he turned his 
arms against the West. After a protracted struggle, he succeeded 
in reducing Media to obedience. He then conquered Susiana, 
Persia, and Babylonia, extending his dominion on this side as far 
as the lower course of the Euphrates. Nor did these gains content 
him. After the death of Eucratides (about b.c. 160), he resumed his 
war with the Bactrians, and completely destroyed their kingdom. 
In vain did these unfortunately isolated Greeks implore the help 
of their Syrian brethren. Demetrius Nicator, who in b.c. 140 
endeavoured to relieve them, was defeated and made prisoner by 
Mithridates, who retained him in captivity till his own death, 
about B.C. 136. 

The Indian conquests of Mithridates 1, which rest on the authority of 



558 PARTHIA. [book v. 

Diodorus and Orosius, are extremely doubtful. Trogus appears to have known 
nothing of them. 

3. The satrapial system^ which had been introduced by the 
Persians, and continued by Alexander and his successors, was not 
Organisation that adopted by Mithridates in the organisation of 
of the Empire. ]^jg Empire. On the contrary, he reverted to the 
older and simpler plan, which prevailed in the East before the rise 
of the Persians to power. This was to allow each nation to have 
its own native king, its own laws and usages, and simply to 
require the subjection of all these monarchs to the chief of the 
ruling nation as lord paramount, or feudal head. Hence the title 
' King of kings,' so common on the Parthian coins from the time 
of Mithridates. Each 'king' was bound to furnish a contingent 
of troops when required, and likewise an annual tribute j but other- 
wise they were independent. 

3. The constitution under which the Parthians themselves were 
ruled was a kind of limited monarchy. The king was permanently 

Constitution advised by two councils, one consisting of the mem- 
of Parthia. ^gj-g Qf j^jg q^j^ royal house, the other of the great 
men (/neyioraves), comprising both the temporal and spiritual chiefs 
of the nation (the (yo^oX and the [layoi) . The monarchy was elec- 
tive, the kings, however, being necessarily taken from the family of 
the Arsacidae. When the megtstanes had nominated a monarch, 
the right of placing the diadem on his head belonged to the Surena, 
or Field-Marshal. The megtstanes claimed a right to depose a 
monarch who displeased them ; but any attempt to exercise this 
privilege was sure to lead to a civil war, and it was force, not law, 
which determined whether the prince should retain or forfeit his 
crown. 

4. The Parthians affected, in the main, Persian customs. The 
same state and dignity were maintained by the Arsacidae as by 

Manners and ^^ Achaemenidae. The court migrated at different 
customs, seasons of the year to Ctesiphon, Ecbatana, and 
Hyrcania. Polygamy was practised on a large scale, 
not only by the monarch, but by the nobleg. Luxury, however, 
was at no time carried to the same extent by the Parthians as it 
had been by the Persians j the former continued to the last a rude, 
coarse, vigorous people. In some few respects they adopted Greek 
manners, as in the character of their coins and the legends upon 
them, which are Greek from first to last, and evidently imitated 



PAET II. PEE. II.] WAIiS WITH SYRIA. 559 

from the coins of the Seleucidse. Their mimetic art shows also 
Grecian influences j but it never attained to any high degree of 
excellence. 

5. The founder of the Empire, Mithridates I, was succeeded 
upon the throne by his son, Phraates II, who is known as Arsaces 
VII, and reigned about nine or ten years, from about ^^{gn of 
B.C. iq6 to 127. The earlier part of his reign seems Phraates II 

, , . , r ■, , 1 (Arsaces VII), 

to have been quiet and peaceful j but about B.C. 129, b.c. 

Antiochus Sidetes, who reigned over Syria, undertook 136-127. 
an expedition to the East for the purpose of releasing his brother, 
Demetrius, and humbling the pride of the Parthians. Success at 
first attended his efforts. Phraates was defeated in three battles, 
and Babylonia was recovered by the Syrians. A general disposition 
to revolt showed itself among the Parthian feudatories. Phraates, 
reduced to straits, released Demetrius and sent him into Syria (see 
p. 238), while at the same time he invoked the aid of the Turanian 
hordes who bordered his northern frontier. Before these allies, 
however, could arrive, he had brought the Syrian monarch into diffi- 
culties, attacked and overpowered his army in its winter quarters,, 
and slain Sidetes himself in a battle. He now determined to 
invade Syria; but the Turanians, whose aid he had invoked^ dis- 
contented with their treatment, attacked him. A war with these 
nomades followed, in which Phraates was unsuccessful. His army, 
composed in part of captured Greeks, played him false; and he 
himself fell in the fight, about b.c. 127. 

6. On the death of Phraates II, his uncle, Artabanus, was placed 
upon the throne. The Syrian wars now entirely ceased, no effort 
being made by the Seleucidae, after the death of Reign of 
Sidetes, to recover their Eastern provinces. But the . Artabanus 

, ' , , . ^ I u r • (Arsaces VIII), 

place of this enemy was taken by one more formi- about b.c. 
dable. The Turanian races of the tract beyond the 127-124. 
Oxus had been long increasing in power. Their incursions across 
the river, in some of which they reached Hyrcania and Parthia 
Proper, were constant. We have seen that Phraates II, alarmed 
at the attack of Sidetes, called them in to his aid, and afterwards 
lost his life in a war with them. The same fate befell his suc- 
cessor. In an engagement with a Turanian tribe called Tochari, 
he received a wound in his arm, from the effects of which he died, 
about B.C. 124. 

7. Artabanus was succeeded by his son, Mithridates II, who is 



56o PARTHIA. [book v. 

known as Arsaces IX. He was a warlike and powerful prince, 

whose achievements procured him the epithet of 'the Great/ 

Reign of ^6 effectually quelled the spirit of the northern 

Mithridates II nomades, whom he defeated in several engagements j 

about B.C. ' and, in a long series of wars, he extended the 

124-87. Parthian power in many directions. At length he 

engaged in a contest with the Armenian king, Ortoadistes (Arta- 

vasdes ?), who was compelled to a disadvantageous peace, for his 

observance of which he gave hostages, among them Tigranes, a 

prince of the blood royal. Tigranes induced the Parthian monarch 

to aid him in gaining the Armenian throne, by undertaking to 

cede to him a part of Armenia ; and this cession took place about 

B.C. 96. But here the successes of Mithridates came to an end. 

Tigranes, having become king of Armenia, declared war against 

his benefactor, recovered the ceded territory, invaded Parthia itself, 

conquered Adiabene, and forced the kings of Atropatene and Gor- 

dyene to become his tributaries, about b.c. 90 to 87. (See above, 

p. 303.) Soon after this Mithridates seems to have died, after 

a reign which must have exceeded thirty-five years. 

The first contact of the Parthians with the Romans occurred in this reign, 
Mithridates' envoy, Orobazus, having had an interview with Sulla, the Sena- 
torian Commissioner in Asia, B.C. 92. 

8. It is uncertain who was the immediate successor of Mithri- 
dates II. The list of Trogus, as reported by Justin, is here faulty ; 

TT , . and from the incidental notices of other writers, the 
Uncertain _ . ' 

succession, succession of the kings can only be determined con- 

^j!^P|n of jecturally. It is usual to place after Mithridates II 

Mnasciras a certain Mnasciras, who is mentioned by Lucian as 

about B.C. ' a Parthian monarch. But there is no evidence that 

87-76. Mnasciras followed Immediately after Mithridates II, 

or even that he reigned at this period. The next king whom 

we can positively place after Mithridates II is Sanatroeces, who 

mounted the throne, about b.c. 76. 

9. Sanatroeces (Arsaces XI), at the age of eighty, became king 
of Parthia by the assistance of the Sacaraucae, one of the Turanian 

tribes of the north. He reigned seven years only, 

Sana^oeces, from about B.C. 76 to 69. He was contemporary with 

B. c. Tigranes of Armenia and Mithridates of Pontus, and 

76-69. ° _ ' 

seems to have been engaged in war with the former 5 
but the particulars of this contest are unknown. 



PART II. PER. II.] ALLIANCE WITH ROME. 561 

The name of this king appears in the classical writers under various forms, 
as Sintruces, Sintricus, and Sinatruces. But the native form, as appears by a 
coin, is Sanatroeces {'SavaTpotKrjs). 

10. Phraates_, son of Sanatroeces, succeeded him, and took the 
title of 0eos ('God'). Ascending the throne at the moment when 
the Mithridatic War entered on a new phase, the j^^j ^f 
losses of the Pontic monarch having; forced him to Phraates III 

1 r ■ A ■ , , T, (Arsaces XII), 

seek a refuge in Armenia (see p. 297), and Rome b.c. 

being about to transfer the struggle into this quarter, 69-60, 
he was naturally drawn into the contest. Both sides sought his 
alliance j but it was not till Pompey took the direction of the war, 
B.C. 66^ that the Parthian monarch desisted from an attitude of 
neutrality. He then made an alliance with the Romans, and 
while Pompey pressed Mithridates with all his forces, Phraates 
made an attack upon Tigranes. The diversion determined the 
Mithridatic War in favour of Rome ^ but, as usual, when her 
object was gained^ the great Republic repaid assistance with in- 
gratitude. Tigranes was, in b.c. 65, aided by the Romans against 
Phraates. The province of Gordyene, which Phraates had reco- 
vered, was retaken by the Romans and assigned to Armenia. It 
was in vain that the Parthian king remonstrated. Pompey was 
inexorable j and Phraates, about b.c. 6^,^ came to terms with Ti- 
granes. Shortly afterwards (b.c. 60), he died, poisoned, as was 
reputed, by his two sons, Mithridates and Orodes. 

By the results of the Mithridatic War, the Roman and Parthian Empires 
became conterminous. Rome absorbed Syria (see p. 230), vphich bordered on 
the Parthian province of Mesopotamia, the Euphrates flowing between them. 
Hence collision between the two great powers became imminent. 

1 1 . Mithridates, the elder of the two sons of Phraates III, suc- 
ceeded him. Tigranes I having died in Armenia, and Artavasdes, 
his second son, having seized the throne, Mithri- j^^- ^j 
dates became engaged in a war with Armenia on Mithridates III 
behalf of his brother-in-law, Tigranes_, the eldest son b.c. 

of the late king. His efforts, however, were unsuc- 60-55. 
cessful, and had no effect but to alienate Artavasdes. After a 
reign of a few years, Mithridates was deposed by the Parthian 
nobles (see above, § 3) j and, though he maintained himself for 
some considerable time in Babylon, he was at last captured and 
put to death. Orodes, his brother, whom the Parthians had made 
king in his room, succeeded him, about b.c. ^^. 

o o 



562 ' [ PARTHIA. [book v. 



THIRD PERIOD. 

From the Commencement of the Wars with Rome, B.C. 54, to the Destruction 
of the Parthian Empire by the Persians, a.d. 226: 

1. The aggressive policy systematically pursued by the Roman 
Republic rendered a war with Parthia the natural sequel to the 

victories over Mithridates and Tigranes. The 

Orod^es^l Struggle with these princes had revealed to Rome 

(Arsaces XIV). the existence of an Oriental power greater and richer 

ofCrassus, than either Pontus or Armenia; and the jealousy, 

^•_^- as well as the cupidity, of the Republic was stirred 

by the revelation. No special grounds of complaint 

or quarrel were regarded as necessary before the war could be 

commenced. It was enough that the time had arrived when it 

seemed to be for the interest of Rome to increase her Empire 

at the expense of Parthia. War was declared without even a 

pretext, B.C. ^^, and in the following year Crassus attacked 

Orodes. 

The failure of the expedition of Crassus (see p. 438) was owing, in part to 
his age and incapacity, in part to an undue contempt of the Parthian prowess. 
It was only by bitter experience that the Romans learnt to respect the Par- 
thians as soldiers, and to regard them as greatly superior to most other 
Orientals. 

2. The immediate result of the disastrous expedition of Crassus 
was the advance of the Parthians across the Euphrates. In B.C. 52, 

Parthian ^^^ again in the year after, Pacorus, the son of 
expeditions Orodes, at the head of a large and well-appointed 
B.C. 52-51, army, crossed from Mesopotamia into Syria, and 
and 40-38. ravaged the Roman territory far and wide. Upper 
Syria was overrun, Cilicia invaded, Antioch and Antigoneia threat- 
ened, the Roman general, Bibulus_, defeated. Cassius, however, 
gained certain successes -, and suspicion having been thrown upon 
the loyalty of Pacorus, Orodes recalled him, and withdrew his 
troops within the Euphrates. But eleven years later he made a 



PAET II. PER. III.] WARS WITH ROME. 563 

second advance. Once more Pacorus, this time assisted by the 
Roman refugee, Labienus, crossed the Euphrates, b. c. 40, and in- 
vaded the Syrian presidency. A Roman army, under Decidius 
Saxa, was destroyed j Antioch, Apameia, Sidon, Ptolemai's, were 
occupied j Jerusalem was entered and plundered, and Antigonus 
set, as Parthian viceroy, upon the throne (see p. 317). The Par- 
thians were complete masters of Syria, Phoenicia, and Palestine ; 
and proceeded to invade Asia Minor, occupying the whole south 
coast as far as Caria, and sending their plundering bands into 
Ionia and the Roman ' Asia.' At this point, however, their pro- 
gress was stayed^ and reverses began to befal them. Ventidius 
defeated and slew Labienus in b.c. 39, and gained a similar success 
over Pacorus in the next year. The Parthians retired from Syria, 
never to reoccupy it, and henceforth were content to resist the 
attacks and aggressions of the Romans. 

3. The death of Orodes followed closely upon this defeat, B.C. '^y. 
He either died of grief for the loss of Pacorus, or was murdered by 
Phraates, the son whom he had put forward as his sue- d th f 
cessor when he heard of Pacorus' decease. Phraates Orodes and 
IV succeeded him and reigned as Arsaces XV. Against phraateTiV 
him Antony, in b.c. 36, led his great expedition. (For ^-c- 37. 
this, see p. 451.) Once more on Parthian soil the of Antony, 
Romans were completely baffled ; and the retreat of ^- ^- ^^■ 
Antony was almost as disastrous as that of the army of Crassus. 
The Parthian power issued from these early contests with Rome 
intact j each side held its own ; and it seemed as if the Euphrates 
was to be a permanent barrier which the Terminus of neither 
nation could cross. 

4. An uninteresting period of the Parthian history now sets in. 
Rome and Parthia abstain equally from direct attacks upon each 
other, while each endeavours to obtain a predomi- 
nant influence in Armenia, which alternately leans Pardiian hi'sto°y, 
on one or other of the two powers. Troubles are ^^o™ ^•^- ^^ 
excited by the Romans within the Parthian royal 

family j and almost every reign exhibits one or more pretenders 
to the throne^ who disturb and sometimes expel the legitimate 
monarch. This period lasted 150 years — from the retreat of An- 
tony, B.C. 36, to the sixteenth year of Trajan, a.d. 114. It is 
unnecessary to do more than briefly indicate the succession of the 
kings during this space. 

002 



564 PARTHIA. [BooKV. 

Line of Kings from Phraates IV to Chosroes, B.C. 37 to a.d. 107. 
Phraates IV (Arsaces XV) reigned from B.C. 37 to a.d. 4. He was annoyed 
by a pretender named Tiridates, whom Augustus encouraged, and was finally 
murdered by his female slave, Thermusa, whom he had married. Phraataces, 
the son of Phraates IV and this Thermusa, succeeded as Arsaces XVI. He 
reigned only a few months, being put to death by the Parthians, who gave the 
crown to a certain Orodes, a member of the royal family, whose exact rela- 
tionship to the preceding monarchs is unknown. Orodes II (Arsaces XVII) 
reigned, like Phraataces, for a few months only, being put to death about a.d. 5, 
on account of his cruelty. The Parthians then sent to Rome for Vonones, 
the eldest of the sons of Phraates IV, who was sent to them by Augustus, and 
ruled from about a.d. 6 to 14, as Arsaces XVIII, when he was compelled to 
yield his crown to another member of the royal family, Artabanus. Artaba- 
nus II (Arsaces XIX) held the throne from about a.d. 14 to 44. His reign was 
stormy, troubled by a revolt of the Babylonian Jews, by pretenders whom 
Tiberius supported, and by rebellions of the tributary monarchs. At his death, 
war broke out between two of his sons, Gotarzes and Vardanes, who both 
claimed the kingdom. Vardanes, the younger, was successful after a sharp 
struggle, and reigned as Arsaces XX, from about a.d. 44 to 48, when Gotarzes 
renewed the fight, and the Parthians, deserting Vardanes, slew him and made 
Gotarzes king. Gotarzes (Arsaces XXI) held the throne from a.d. 48 to 50. 
The chief event of his reign was a war with the pretender, Meherdates, son of 
Vonones I, who was supported by the Romans, but fell after a short contest. 
Gotarzes himself died soon afterwards, probably by a natui-al death. The 
next king was Vonones II (Arsaces XXII). He was a member of the royal 
family, and had governed Media Atropatene under Gotarzes, but seems not to 
have been a near relation. His reign, which lasted only a few months, was 
unmarked by any important event. Vologeses I (Arsaces XXIII), the eldest 
of his sons, succeeded him. He reigned for the space of forty years, from about 
A.D. 50 to 90, and was contemporary with eight Roman Emperors, Claudius, 
Nero, Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian. The contention 
between Rome and Parthia, with respect to supremacy over Armenia, came 
to a head during his reign, when his brother, Tiridates, to whom he had given 
the Armenian crown, was so harassed by the Romans — more especially by 
Nero's general, Corbulo, a.d. 56 to 64 — that he consented at last to renounce 
his allegiance to Parthia, and to accept the Armenian kingdom from Nero, 
which he held thenceforth as a Roman fief, a.d. 65. After this, Parthia re- 
mained at peace with Rome for nearly half a century, and very little is known 
of its condition. Vologeses seems to have died about a.d. 90. He left two sons, 
Pacorus and Chosroes, the elder of whom, Pacorus, succeeded him. Pacorus 
(Arsaces XXIV), who succeeded Vologeses, reigned from about A.D. 90 to 107. 
Nothing is known of him except that he beautified Ctesiphon. He was suc- 
ceeded, about A.D. 107, by his brother Chosroes, in whose reign the Parthian 
history again becomes important and interesting. 

5. Chosroes (Arsaces XXV), on obtaining the crown, proceeded 

almost immediately to assert the authority of Parthia over Armenia 

by deposing the reigning monarch, Exedares, and 

Reign of y x cj *_» <_> j j 

Chosroes, placing his nephew, Parthamasiris, the son of Pa- 
(Arsaces XXV), corus, upon the Armenian throne. This act fur- 

A.D. 107-121. ' ^ 

Expedition of nished an excuse to Trajan for his Eastern expedi- 

rajan. tion, a part of his great scheme of conquest. (See 

pp. 491, 492.) The earlier operations of the Roman Emperor were 

altogether successful; he deprived Parthamasiris of his kingdom. 



PAET II. PEE. III.] WAJ^S WITH ROME. 565 

and made Armenia a Roman province, without a struggle j he 
rapidly overran Mesopotamia and Assyria, taking the cities one 
after another, and added those countries to the Empire ; he 
pressed southward, took Seleuceia, Ctesiphon, and Babylon, de- 
scended the Tigris to the sea, and received the submission of 
Mesene, the tract upon the Persian Gulf. In another direction 
his arms penetrated as far as Susa. But it was easier to conquer 
than to hold. Revolts broke out in the countries already occupied, 
at Seleuceia, at Edessa, at Nisibis, at Hatra, and elsewhere. Trajan 
felt that he must retire. To cover the ignominy of his retreat, he 
held an assembly at Ctesiphon, and placed his more southern con- 
quests under the sovereignty of a mock king, a native named 
Parthamaspates. His other conquests, Armenia, Mesopotamia, 
and Assyria, he maintained and strongly garrisoned. But they 
continued Roman for only about two years (a.d. 115 to 117). The 
first act of Hadrian was to relinquish the whole re- „. 

^ _ His conquests 

suits of the Parthian war of Trajan, and to withdraw abandoned by 
the legions within the line of the Euphrates (see ^ "^"' 

p. 493) . Chosroes returned to his capital, Parthamaspates quitting 
it and falling back on his Roman friends, who made him king of 
Armenia. The Parthian Empire was restored to its old limits j 
and friendly relations subsisted between Chosroes and Hadrian 
until the death of the former, probably about a.d. 121. 

6. The successor of Chosroes was his son, Vologeses II (Arsaces 
XXVI), who reigned from about a.d. 121 to 149. He kept the peace 
with Rome throughout the whole of his reign, though Rei^n of 
sorely tempted to interfere with the affairs of Ar- Vologeses II 

• , • 1 1 I • • ^ -r. (Arsaces XXVI), 

menia, which had reverted to the position of a Roman a.d. 

fief. He was contemporary with Antoninus Pius. 121-149. 
The only important event of his reign was an invasion of Media 
Atropatene by the Alani^ who were becoming formidable in the 
tract between the Black Sea and the Caspian. Vologeses bribed 
these enemies to retire. 

7. His successor was another Vologeses, the third of the name, 
who was probably his son. He reigned from about a.d. 149 to 192. 
During the lifetime of Antoninus Pius, he remained Reign of 

at peace with the Romans ; but soon after the acces- , 7°^°^^t^^T?T^Tx 

.--.. ,. , ^, ,, (Arsaces XXVII), 

sion of- M. Aurelius (b.c. 161) he provoked a war by about a.d. 
invading Armenia for the purpose of severing its 149-192. 
connection with Rome. At the outset he was successful ; Armenia 



566 PARTHIA. [book v. 

was occupied j Severianus, Roman prefect of Cappadocia, was 
defeated, his army destroyed, and he himself slain; the Parthian 
hordes once more crossed the Euphrates, and carried devastation 
into Syria ; but their triumph was short-lived. Verus was sent to 
the East ; and though individually he did nothing, yet his generals 
gained great advantages. The Parthians were driven from Syria 
and Armenia ; Mesopotamia was occupied j Seleuceia, Ctesiphon, 
and Babylon taken ; and the royal palace at Ctesiphon burnt 
(a.d. 165). Parthia then sued for peace, and obtained it by ceding 
Mesopotamia, and allowing Armenia to return to the position of 
a Roman dependency (see p. 497). Vologeses, thus humbled, re- 
mained quiet during his later years, living on friendly terms with 
M. Aurelius and with Commodus. 

8. Vologeses III left two sons, Vologeses and Tiridates, of whom 
the elder, Vologeses, succeeded him. This prince, having unfor- 

Reign of tunately attached himself to the cause of Pescennius 
Vologeses IV Niger, A.D. 1 93, was attacked by the Roman Em- 
about A. D. peror, Septimius Severus, after he had defeated Niger, 
192-21.3. ^j^j suffered important reverses. The Roman army 
advanced through Mesopotamia to the Tigris, crossed into Assyria, 
and occupied Adiabene, descended the river in ships to Ctesiphon, 
which it took and plundered, captured also Seleuceia and Babylon, 
and returned without suffering any worse defeat than a double 
repulse from the walls of Hatra. The only permanent fruit of the 
campaign was, however, the addition of Adiabene, or Northern 
Assyria, to the Empire, which the Parthian monarch was forced to 
cede to his adversary, a.d. 199. Nothing more is known of Volo- 
geses IV, excepting that he left several sons, and that he reigned 
till about A.D. 212 or 213. 

Some writers (as Clinton) interpose between Vologeses III and IV a certain 
Pacorus, whose name exists upon a coin, with a date equivalent to A.D. 198. 
But as it seems certain from Dig that a Vologeses, and not a Pacorus, was the 
opponent of Severus in that year, and almost certain that this same Vologeses 
lived on into the reign of Caracallus, we must regard Pacorus as a pretender, 
who, when Vologeses IV was driven from his capital, claimed the throne. 

9. Upon the death of Vologeses IV, a contention arose between 
his sons with respect to the succession, which seems to have fallen. 

Reign of ^^'^^^ ^ short Struggle, to another Vologeses, who was 

Vologeses V king when Caracallus, wishing to pick a quarrel with 

about A.D. rarthia, sent to demand the surrender of two re- 

213-216. fugees, Tiridates and Antiochus. Vologeses at first 



PAET II. PER. III.] FALL OF THE EMPIRE. 567 

refused j but^ when he was threatened with invasion, yielded, 
A.D. 215. Soon after this, he must have ceased to reign, for we 
find Caracallus, in a.d. 216, negotiating with Artabanus. 

10. Artabanus (Arsaces XXX), the last king of Parthia, is 
thought to have been a son of Vologeses IV and a brother of 
Vologeses V. He reigned from a.d. 215 or 2i5 to Reign of 
226. Caracallus, bent on a Parthian campaign, in /ArsaceTxxx^) 
which he was to rival Alexander, sent, in a.d. 216, to about a.d. 

215—226 

demand the daughter of Artabanus in marriage. Ar- Destruction of 
tabanus refused, and Caracallus immediately crossed the Empire, 
the Euphrates, took possession of Osrhoene, proceeded through 
Mesopotamia to the Tigris, invaded Adiabene, took Arbela, and 
drove the Parthians into the mountains. He then returned to 
Edessa in Osrhoene, and was proceeding in the year following to 
renew his attack, when he was murdered by order of Macrinus, 
his Praetorian prefect. Macrinus then carried on the war for a 
short time, but, being twice defeated by Artabanus near Nisibis, 
he was content to purchase peace by the expenditure of a large 
sum of money and the surrender of all the Roman possessions 
beyond the Euphrates. The dominions of the Parthians were thus 
once more extended to their ancient limits, and Artabanus had 
even reclaimed and exercised the old Parthian suzerainty over 
Armenia, by appointing his own brother to be king, when sud- 
denly an insurrection broke out in the south. The Persians, under 
Artaxerxes, the son of Sassan, rebelled, after four centuries of 
subjection, against their Parthian lords^ defeated the forces of 
Artabanus in three great battles, and in the third slew that king 
himself. The Parthian Empire came thus suddenly to an end, 
A.D. 226, when it had given few signs of internal decay or 
weakness. It was succeeded by the New Persian Monarchy, 
or Kingdom of the Sassanidse, which lasted from a.d. 226 to 
652. 

This revolution was a recovery by the old Arian race of the supremacy so 
long wielded by the Tatars. It was accompanied by a complete change in the 
government and the religion. The new Persian kingdom had important 
relations with Rome during almost the whole period of its continuance ; but, 
as these relations were chiefly with the Eastern Empire, whose history the 
design of this work does not include, no account will be here given of the 
Sassanian dynasty. Those who wish for information on the subject, will find 
it in the following works : — 

RiCHTER, C. F,, Historisch-Kritischer Fersuch, &c. (see p. 654). 
Malcolm, Sir J., History of Persia. London, 1815 ; 2 vols, 4to, 



568 PARTHIA. 

De SacY, S., Memoires sur di'verses Antiquites de la Perse, et sur les Medallles 
des Sassanides, a'vec Vhistoire des Sassanides par Mirkhond. Paris, 1793 ; 4to. 

D'HerbeLOT, Bibliotheque Orientale, ou Dictionnaire uni'versel, contenant tout 
ce qui fait connaitre les feuples de V Orient. Paris, 1781-83 ; 6 vols. 8vo. 

A brief outline of the history is given by Mr. Clinton in his Fasti Romani, 
vol. ii. pp. 259-263; and a somewhat fuller account will be found in Dr. 
Smith's Diet, of Greek and Roman Biography, sub voc. SASSANID-S. 



569 



02 

pq 

OQ 

o 

w 

O 

(^ 

|zi 

H 

o 

fl 
pq 
o 



H 


s 


p 


H 




r3 


c3 





SD-? 







u fc! 


l- 


-8- 


'-1 


1 


« 




^ 


fL, 


"re 




8 






H S 









■-go 






jr s — u 

o K 






•-1 W ffi 



Z^ 



.6 

.a <u 



W^ 



13 'g 



°?.S 



0) 

-a 
a 

a 

<» 

f-H 



PL, 



?; 
o 
o 

§ I 

fa ° 

o .Sf 
o 

HI 



11 i-i 



S-2 



i-a 



Q 



" 3 



w •< 



o 'i: 

W u 

03 O 
O n^ 

10 pu 



O 3 
u 

OS Ss 
S ° 
d •- 

■o a- 



<l 



rt 



H Pi 






a is 

■< 4) 

P 



H 
H 



O ^ 
rt .3 

iJ -^ 



m =1 






57° 




O _ri 



5 M 



r-l IH O 



571 



03 

H 

H 

w 

Hi 

o 

M 
o 

02 

o 

W 

o 




572 




<1 

w 

E^ 

H 

m 
o 

H 

03 
O 

W 

H^ 

<^ 

o 



+3 M - g 
O eS Pi__ 

m w N 









2 -^ 






_!3 



r-! rt 









L o o 



573 



o 

PM 

Ph 
O 

w 

03 
t3 
O 

w 

O 

P4 



^oT <J 



^ H H H, 
H H m H 






I 5 



^ S li ^ g' 



J<; 



h- « CO 



r3 o 



O >. 

-^ P5 
vaJ~ O t„ 

o ^ O 
•■-a> «= 

o <u 

2 o 
« .a 
•c z 
< . 



rl IH 



o O rt 

— ^ Jli .« 

OS 

=* ir! -^ 

1^ 



B a 



in o 



S s I 

_■!-( O " 



574 






o 

< 

< 
O 

o 

H 

03 

O 

W 

Hi 

o 

P3 



r^S 



E^ 



h'^ > jy 



<5 
i ^^ 



^13 ^ '-M 






i>H:) 



t; » N 



■^ _|_3 g A 






■fn -^ 



r^ 



'oT 


^ 


*-» 


0) 

l-H 


•3 




•s 




o 


1 

c3 


o 


T3 


m 


•q 




l-i 

JII 



<1 „-,t; 



'^ "■" V, 

V n u> 
ti is '" 






tuo 



CO 



575 



2 ^ 



fl « 
§ S 



CQ 




H 


oi 


OQ 


W 


O 


W 


H 


o 




o 


hi 


< 


<1 


s 


fe 


H 


o 


w 


Ph 


H 


M 

03 


fa 
O 


H 






w 
O 



o 

• iH 






I 



-'I 



o 
rs. 



'-' S o5 

■SS o 



o c ^^ 



4) C3 



8 e 



U6 









576 



>^ ^^ 



8 "^ 



_^ 3 "" ca _ 



J3H 






O 

12; 
< 

1— > 
w 



<1 u 



"3 






' — I 


^ 


^ 


o 


<1 


ro 








r^ 


«: 




^ 


3 


rt 


u 
■^ 




"S 

o_ 


>^ 


d 




L.J2 


4^ 


o 


o 


o 


(72 


O 


N 



J«, O) 1-1 

a! ^ — !-> 

■H 
f-t 

0) 



> o 



. ;^ o pq ^ 

=1 o 3 S 
' 1 "> :r; (u 



Izic*;: 



^ S 

Ho 



RS in 



■3>' 



o 00 O 

> ■ 
o 

o 



1) in 
O W3 



s ^ I— 1 



c3E5 



•go A 



'a, • 
3 






TO 



.S pi 

-13 

.3 t> 

c "^ 

1—1 R 



3 a fH 



I rt o ■ 



* i-i 

'a 



- &D 3 



o 



L o 



S.2 .2 -.s 
^ • - i^ 8 -5 



SO 









c3 = , 



i— Q 



g 6:h 

Q . hJ 
8 



»5 .2 "S 



577 



^ 2 






? •= =1 a 









rt S 



^^ 



Q 


3 ts 


P 




<3 


J 


W3 ^ 


O 


■3'i 




t-H W 


w 


^ rt 




9 




s 


• 


Q 



n 



s^ 



2 .2 ^ 'd 
JS r^ 13 i5D 



H « ro ^ U5VO 



H s 






2g 



rt S 3 



Ceo 
<!00 



« l_l Crt ^ 

ir, *^ >- .« 
• h • o ^ 



2 



Ot3 



_ 3 .S 









t^ 



6-2 
OS 



■^^,8 =5 -ft; 



1 1- 



rt O 

P-. 



■ E t< 



Je 



578 



,8 


w 


o 


■J3 
8 


g 


^ 


O 


H 


F- 


■^-^ 


z 


C' 


03 


<l 




02 
t3 


H 

o 


a 
"33 


o 


o 


K 


in 


[X, 


M 


i^ 


o 


S 


< 


w 


«r 


M 


CO 


3 




O 


O 

O 




H 


!» 
tf 


1^ 


w 


• H 




H 




^ 




S 




d 


+3 
o 


o 




o 


« 







g Oh 2 
3 Ph o 

W Oh 






■B S 

J .a 

S.S. 



.2 3 

.-a c 

_ O i3 

d, O 



rs 

H 



I-)' 

fit 



^ _S as 

6 s ^" 



q .2 d 

ts 5 <" , 

;ri ^ C ' 

rt tn O 

r-r9 S U 

3 t<-i ' 

C! O O 
al . . 

W S"o 



ro 






T3 


C 


•l-l 




c 


s 






h. 




c 




o 






u 



"^ Ha 



. o s 

^/^^ 
• M --9 



5i L B 





^ 


(LI 


3 


o 




(U 






M 


^^ 




H 




m 


C 


1 


a 


03 


S 



PI w 
O . 



l?5 W 



cs rt 



01 



O rt 



H 
H 

g .si 

rt — rt ra 



K K 



S.3 

^ +3 

« Oh rt 

.S'o S 
na T3 += ■ 



•H rh 



^1 



Sb 






o „ 



S :5^ 






p|-y 



579 



03 r^ 



w 

EH 

O 

xn 

02 
P 

o 

w 

Hi 

<l 

N 
o 

r4 



1- <-" 



<1S g^ 



W 
O 
< 

CO 

Pi 

o 



< H 



«Jl PH 



H 

CO ^ |_j 

"C u — <I> *^ 



w 
o 

< 












<U J- 


c 


fi. 


'S 


b>^ 


h"^' 


G 


T3 


& 


t-i 


H 








o^ 



H C^ 

.iH O 



> 


^ 


e^ 


H 


> 


p 




X 


s 


+=> 




I-^ 


d 


V 


(U 


c3 


u 


rJ=! 


b 


rt 


H 



f46S 



,e-^ 



M > 



Pi o 



58o 



O N 



P^O 



NX 



% I 

<i ^ 



2§ 

H 

;3 





w 




;z; 




o 


*M -^ 


12: 


Sx 


o 




t> 


\^ 


55s 


o 


>l 




'^^ 


p 




o 




HI 



><. 



.-I < — ?, < 






H C 
O S 



kX 

"IX 



H K 



_s^...s>^- 






<U 



O <j a, 



r'i 



gx 

-d <« — 






5 s -=i 



><. >: 



>< 



> 

0! 1— < 

piX 









BO « 



:q 






t>x 



O M 



2 boja 

Ph (U J3 



M &o 



February, 1870. 

BOOKS 

PRINTED AT 

THE CLAEENDOIT PRESS, OXFORD, 

AND PUBLISHED FOR THE UNIVERSITY BY 

MACMILLAN AND CO., 

1 6, BEDFORD STREET, COVENT GARDEN, 

LONDON. 

Many Books In this Catalogue have lately been much reduced in Price. 

LEXICONS, GRAMMABS, &c. 

A G-reek-English Lexicon, by Henry George Liddell, D.D., and 
Robert Scott, D.D. Sixth Edition, Revised and Augmented. 1870. 4to. cloth, 
il. 1 6s. 

A Greek-Englisli Lexicon, abridged from the above, chiefly for the 

use of Schools. Thirteenth Edition. 1869. square i2mo. cloth, 'js. 6d. 

A copious Greek-English Vocabulary, compiled from the best 
authorities. 1850. 24mo. bound, ^s. 

Graecae Grammaticae Rudimenta in usum Scholarum. Auctore 
Carolo Wordsworth, D.C.L. Sixteenth Edition. 1867. i2mo. bound, ^s. 

A Greek Primer, in EngUsh, by the Right Rev. Charles Wordsworth, 
D.C.L., Bishop of St. Andrews, etc. Preparing. 

A Practical Introduction to Greek Accentuation, by H.W. Chandler, 

M.A. 1862. 8vo. cloth, IDS. 6d. 

Etymologicon Magnum. Ad Codd. MSS. recensuit et notis variorum 
instriixit Thomas Gaisford, S.T.P. 1848. fol. cloth, il. 12s. 

Suidae Lexicon. Ad Codd. MSS. recensuit Thomas Gaisford, S.T.P. 

Tomi III. 1834. fol. cloth. Price reduced from 3Z. 12s. to 2I. 2s. 

Scheller's Lexicon of the Latin Tongue, with the German explanations 
translated into English by J. E. Riddle, M.A. 1835. fol. cloth, il. is. 

Scriptores Rei Metricae. Edidit Thomas Gaisford, S.T.P. Tomi 

III. 8vo. cloth. Price reduced from ll. los. to 15s. 
Sold separately : 
Hephaestion, Terentianus Maurus, Proclus, cum annotationibus, etc. Tomi II. 

1855. 8vo. cloth. Price reduced from ll. 5s. to los. 
Scriptores Latini. 1837. 8vo. cloth, 5s. 

Thesaurus Syriacus : coUegerunt Quatrembre, Bernstein, Lorsbach, 
Amoldi, Field. Edidit R. Payne Smith, S.T.P.R. 

Fasciculus I. 1868. sm. fol. i/. i.r. 

Fasciculus IL In the Press. 



2 Catalogue of Books 

Lexicon Aegyptiaco-Latinum ex veteribus Linguae Aegyptiacae 
Monumentis, etc., cum Indice Vocum Latinarum ab H. Tattam, A.M. 1835. 
8vo. cloth. Price reduced from iZ. los. (id. to 15s. , 

A Practical Grammar of the Sanskrit Language, arranged with 
reference to the Classical Languages of Europe, for the use of English Students, 
by Monier Williams, M.A. Third Edition. 1864. 8vo. cloth, i^s. 

INalopakhyanam. Story of Nala, an Episode of the MaharBharata : 

the Sanskrit text, with a copious Vocabulary, Grammatical Analysis, and Intro- 
duction, by Monier Williams, M.A. The Metrical Translation by the Very Rev. 
H. H. Milman, D.D. i860. 8vo. cloth, 15s. 

A Sanskrit-Englisli Dictionary, by Monier Williams, M.A., Boden 
Professor of Sanskrit. In the Press. 

An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary, by Joseph Bosworth, D.D., Professor 

of Anglo-Saxon, Oxford. New Edition. Preparing. 

An Icelandic-English Dictionary. By the late R. Cleasby. En- 
larged and completed by G. Vigfiisson. Part I. 1869. 4to. 21s. 

A Handbook of the Chinese Language. Parts I and II. Grammar 
and Chrestomathy. By James Summers. 1863. 8vo. half bound, rl. 8s. 

Cornish Drama (The Ancient). Edited and translated by E. Norris, 
Esq., with a Sketch of Cornish Grammar, an Ancient Cornish Vocabulary, etc. 
2 vols. 1859. 8vo. cloth, il. Is. 

The Sketch of Cornish Grammar separately, stitched, 2s. 6d. 



GREEK AND LATIN CLASSICS. 

Aeschylus : Tragoediae et Fragmenta, ex recensione Guil. Dindorfii. 

Second Edition. 1851. 8vo. cloth, ^s.6d. 

Aeschylus: Annotationes Guil. Dindorfii. Partes II. 1841. %so. cloth, 

I OS. 

Aeschylus : Scholia Graeca, ex Codicibus aucta et emendata a Guil. 
Dindorfio. 1851. 8vo. cloth, 5s. 

Sophocles : Tragoediae et Fragmenta, ex recensione et cum commen- 
tariis Guil. Dindorfii. Third Edition. 2 vols. i860, fcap. 8vo. cloth, il. is. 
Each Play separately, limp, 2s. 6d. 

The Text alone, printed on writing paper, with large margin, royal 
i6mo. cloth, 8s. 

The Text alone, square i6mo. cloth, 2^. 6d. 

Each Play separately, limp, 6d. 

Sophocles : Tragoediae et Fragmenta cum Annotatt. Guil. Dindorfii. 
Tomi II. 1849. 8vo. cloth, 10s. 

The Text, Vol. I. 5s. 6d. The Notes, Vol. II. 4s. 6d. 

Sophocles : Scholia Graeca. 

Vol. I. ed. P. Elmsley, A.M. 1825. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d. 
Vol. II. ed. Guil. Dindorfius. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d. 



Printed at the Clarendon Press. ^ 

Euripides : Tragoediae et Fragmenta, ex recensione Guil. Dindorfii. 

Tomi II. 1834. 8vo. cloth, los. 

Euripides: Annotationes Guil. Dindorfii. Partes II. 1840. cloth, los. 

Euripides: Scholia Graeca, ex Codicibus aucta et emendata a Guil. 
Dindorfio. Tomi IV. 1863. 8vo. cloth, il. 16s. 

Euripides: Alcestis, ex recensione Guil. Dindorfii. 1834. Svo. sewed, 
2s. 6d. 

Aristophanes: Comoediae et Fragmenta, ex recensione Guil. Din- 
dorfii. Tomi II. 1835. Svo. cloth, lis. 

Aristophanes: Annotationes Guil. Dindorfii. Partes II. 1837. Svo. 

cloth, IIS. 

Aristophanes : Scholia Graeca, ex Codicibus aucta et emendata a Guil. 
Dindorfio. Partes III. 1839. Svo. cloth, il. 

Aristophanem, Index in: J. Caravellae. 1822. Svo. clo/h, y. 

Metra Aeschyli Sophoclis Euripidis et Aristophanis. Descripta 

a Guil. Dindorfio. Accedit Chronologia Scenica. 1842. Svo. cloth, 5s. 

Aneedota Graeca Osoniensia. Edidit J. A. Cramer, S.T. P. Tomi 

IV. 1834-37. 8vo. cloth, ll. -25. 

Aneedota Graeca e Codd. MSS. Bibliothecae Regiae Parisiensis. 
Edidit J. A. Cramer, S.T. P. Tomi IV. 1839-41. Svo. cloth, \1. 2s. 

Apsinis et Longini Ilhetorica. E Codicibus MSS. recensuit Joh. 
Bakius. 1849. 8'^°- '^^oti't 3s- 

Aristoteles: ex recensione Immanuelis Bekkeri. Accedunt Indices 
Sylburgiani. Tomi XI. 1837. Svo. cloth, 2I. los. 

Each volume separately, 5s. 6d. 

CatulliVeronensis Liber: recognovit, apparatum criticum prolegomena 
appendices addidit, Robinson Ellis, A.M. 1867. Svo. cloth, i6s. 

Choerobosci Dictata in Theodosii Canones, necnon Epimerismi in 
Psalmos. E Codicibus MSS. edidit Thomas Gaisford, S.T.P. Tomi III. iS4'2. 
Svo. cloth, 15s. 

Demosthenes: ex recensione Guil. Dindorfii. Tomi I. II. III. IV. 

1846. Svo. cloth. Price reduced from 2I. 2s. to il. Is. 

Demosthenes: Tomi V. VI. VII. Annotationes Interpretum. 1849. 

Svo. cloth. Price reduced from il. l6s. to 15s. 

Demosthenes: Tomi VIII. IX. Scholia. 1851. Svo. clof/i. Price 

reduced from 15s. to los, 

Harpocrationis Lexicon, ex recensione G. Dindorfii. Tomi IL 
Z854. Svo. cloth. Price reduced from il. is. to los. 6d. 

Herculanensium Voluminum Partes II. 1824, 1825. Svo. cIo/L 

Price reduced from 1 1. 5s. to los. 

Homerus: Ilias, cum brevi Annotatione C. G. Heynii. Accedunt 
Scholia minora. Tomi II. 1834. Svo. cloth, 15s. 



4 Catalogue of Books 

Homerus: Ilias, ex rec. Guil. Dindorfii. 1856. 8vo. cloth, ^s. 6d. 

Homerus : Odyssea, ex rec. Guil. Dindorfii. 1855. 8vo. doth, ^s.6d. 

Homerus: Scholia Graeca in Odysseam. Edidit Guil. Dindorfius. 
Tomi II. 1855. 8vo. cloth, i^s. 6d. 

Homerum, Index in : Seberi. 1780. 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d. 

Oratores Attici ex recensione Bekkeri: 

I. Antiphon, Andocides, et Lysias. 1822. Svo. cloth, "js. 
II. Isocrates. 1822. Svo. cloth, 7s. 
III. Isaeus, Aeschines, Lycurgus, Dinarchus, etc. 1823. 8vo. cloth, 'js. 

Scholia Graeca in Aeschinem et Isocratem. Edidit G. Dindorfius. 
1852. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 

Paroemiograplii Graeei, quorum pars nunc primum ex Codd. MSS. 
vulgatur. Edidit T. Gaisford, S.T. P. 1836. 8vo. cZo//&, 5s. 6c?. 

Plato : The Apology, with a revised Text and Enghsh Notes, and a 
Digest of Platonic Idioms, by James Riddell, M.A. 1867. 8vo. cloth, 8s. 6d. 

Plato : Philebus, with a revised Text and English Notes, by Edward 
Poste, M.A. i860. 8vo. cloth, 'js. 6d. 

Plato : Sophistes and Politicus, with a revised Text and English 
Notes, by L. Campbell, M.A. 1866. Svo. cloth, iSs. 

Plato : Theaetetus, with a revised Text and English Notes, by L. 
Campbell, M.A. 1861. Svo. cloth, 9s. 

Plato : The Dialogues, translated into English, with Introductions, by 
B. Jowett, M.A., Fellow of Balliol College and Regius Professor of Greek. In 
four volumes ; Vols. I-III vfiW be published in the course of the present year. 

Plato : The Republic, with a revised Text and English Notes, by B. 
Jowett, M.A., Fellow^ of Balliol College and Regius Professor of Greek. Demy Svo. 
Preparing. 

Plotinus. Edidit F. Creuzer. Tonii III. 1835. 4to. cloth, il. %s. 

Stobaei Plorilegium. Ad MSS. fidem emendavit et supplevit T. 
Gaisford, S.T.P. Tomi IV. 1S22. Svo. cloth, i/. 

Stobaei Eelogarum Physicarum et Ethicarum libri duo. Accedit 
Hieroclis Commentarius in aurea carraina Pythagoreorum. Ad MSS. Codd. 
recensuit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. Tomi II. 1850. Svo. cloth, lis. 

Xenophon: Historia Graeca, ex recensione et cum annotationibus 

L. Dindorfii. Second Edition. 1852. Svo. cloth, los. 6d. 

Xenophon: Expeditio Cyri, ex rec. et cum annotatt. L. Dindorfii. 

Second Edition. 1855. ^vo. cloth, los. 6d. 

Xenophon: Institutio Cyri, ex rec. et cum annotatt. L. Dindorfii. 1857. 
Svo. cloth, los. 6d. 

Xenophon : Memorabilia Socratis, ex rec. et cum annotatt. L. Dindorfii. 

1S62. Svo. cloth, 7s. 6d. 

Xenophon : Opuscula Politica Equestria et Venatica cum Arriani Libello 
de Venatione, ex rec. et cum annotatt. L. Dindorfii. 1866. Svo. clotb, los. 6d. 



Printed at the Clarendon Press. 



THE HOLY SCRIPTUEES, &c. 

The Holy Bible in the earliest English Versions, made from the Latin 

Vulgate by John Wycliffe and his followers : edited by the Rev. J. Foishall and 
Sir F. Madden. 4 vols. 1850. royal 4to. cloth. Price reduced from 1,1. 15s. dd. 
to 3/. 3s. 

The Holy Bible : an exact reprint, page for page, of the Authorized 
Version published in the year 1611. Demy 4to. half bound, il. is. 

Vetus Testamentum Graece cum Variis Lectionibus. Editionem a 
R. Holmes, S.T.P. inchoatam continuavit J. Parsons, S.T.B. Tomi V. 1798- 
1827. foliOj i'i sheets. Price reduced from lol. to 7/. 

Vetus Testamentum Graece secundum exemplar Vaticanum Romae 
editum. Accedit potior varietas Codicis Alexandrini. Tomi III. 1848. i2mo. 
cloth, 14s. 

Origenis Hexaplorum quae supersunt; sive, Veterum Interpretum 

Graecorum in totum Vetus Testamentum Fragmenta. Edidit Fridericus 
Field, A.M. 

Tom. II. Fasc. I. 1867. 4to. iZ. Tom. II. Fasc. II. 1868. 4to. i6s. 

Pentateuchus Hebraeo-Samaritanus Charactere Hebraeo-Chaldaico. 
Edidit B. Blayney. 1790. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 

Libri Psalmorum Versio antiqua Latina, cum Paraphrasi Anglo- 
Saxonica. Edidit B. Thorpe, F.A.S. 1835. 8vo. cloth, los. 6d. 

Libri Psalmorum Versio antiqua Gallica e Cod. MS. in Bibl. Bod- 

leiana adservato, una cum Versione Metrica aliisque Monumentis pervetustis. 
Nunc primum descripsit et edidit Franciscus Michel, Phil. Doct. i860. 8vo. cloth, 
10s. 6d. 

Libri Prophetarum Majorum, cum Lamentationibus Jeremiae, in 

Dialecto Linguae Aegyptiacae Memphitica seu Coptica. Edidit cum Versione 
Latina H. Tattam, S.T.P. Tomi II. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 17s. 

Libri duodecim Prophetarum Minorum in Ling. Aegypt. vulgo 
Coptica. Edidit H. Tattam, A.M. 1836. 8vo. cloth, 8s. 6d. 

Novum Testamentum Graece. Antiquissimorum Codicum Textus in 
ordine parallelo dispositi. Accedit collatio Codicis Sinaitici. Edidit E. H. Han- 
sell, S.T.B. Tomi III. 1864. Svo. half morocco, 2I. 12s. 6d. 

Novum Testamentum Graece. Accedunt parallela S. Scripturae loca, 
necnon vetus capitulonam notatio et canones Eusebii. Edidit Carolus Lloyd, 
S.T.P.R., necnon Episcopus Oxoniensis. 1869. i8mo. cloth, 3s. 

The same on writing paper, with large margin, small 4to. clofk, 
JOS. 6d. 

Novum Testamentum Graece juxta exemplar Millianum. 1868. 
1 2 mo. cloth, 2s. 6d, 

The same on writing paper, with large margin, small 4to. clof/i, 
6s. 6d. 

The New Testament in Greek and English, on opposite pages, 
arranged and edited by E. Cardwell, D.D. 2 vols. 1837. crown Svo. cloth, 6s. 



6 Catalogue of Books 

Novi Testament! Versio Syriaca Philoxeniana. Edidit Jos. White, 
S.T.P. TomilV. 1778-1803. 4to. cloth, iZ. 8s. 

Novum Testamentum Coptice, cura D. Wilkins. 17 16. 4to. cloth, 
I2S. dd. 

Appendix ad edit. N. T. Gr. e Cod. MS. Alexandrine a C. G. Woide 
descripti. Subjicitur Codicis Vatican! coUatio. 1799. fol. cloth, 2I. 2s. 

Evangeliorum Versio Gothiea, cum Interpr. et Annott. E. Benzelii. 

Edidit, et Gram. Goth, praemisit, E. Lye, A.M. 1759. 4to. cloth, 12s. 6d. 

Diatessaron ; sive Historia Jesu Christi ex ipsis Evangelistarum verbis 
apte dispositis confecta. Ed. J. White. 1856. i2mo. cloth, 3s. 6c?. 

Canon Muratoriamis. The earliest Catalogue of the Books of the 

New Testament. Edited with Notes and a Facsimile of the MS. in the Ambrosian 
Library at Milan, by S. P. Tregelles, LL.D. 1868. 4to. cloth, los. 6d. 

The Five Books of Maccabees, in English, with Notes and Illustra- 
tions by Henry Cotton, D.C.L. 1833. 8vo. cloth, los. 6d. 

The Ormulum, now first edited from the original Manuscript in the 
Bodleian Library (Anglo-Saxon and English), by R. M. White, D.D. 2 vols. 
1852. 8vo. cloth, il. is. 

Horae Hebraicae et Talmudicae, a J. Lightfoot. A new Edition, by 
R. Gandell, M.A. 4 vols. 1859. 8vo. cloth. Price reduced from 2I. 2s. to il. ll. 



FATHERS OF THE CHURCH, &C. 

Catenae Graecorum Patrum in Novum Testamentum. Edidit J. A. 
Cramer, S.T.P. Tomi VIII. 1838-1844. 8vo. cloth, 2I. 4s. 

Clementis Alexandrini Opera, ex recensione Guil. Dindorfii. Tomi 

IV. 1869. 8vo. cloth, 3/. 

Cyrilli Archiepiscopi Alexandrini in XII Prophetas. Edidit P. E. Pusey, 
A.M. Tomi II. 1868. 8vo. cloth, 2I. 2S. 

Cyrilli Archiepiscopi Alexandrini in D. Joannis Evangelium. Accedunt 
in D. Pauli Epistolas quasdam fragmenta quae supersunt necnon fragmenta alia. 
Edidit P. E. Pusey, A.M. Tomi III. In the Press. 

Cyrilli Archiepiscopi Alexandrini Commentarii in Lucae Evangelium 
quae supersunt Syriace. E MSS. apud Mus. Britan. edidit R. Payne Smith, 
A.M. 1858. 4to. cloth, ll. 28. 

The same, translated by R. Payne Smith, M.A. 2 vols. 1859. 8vo. cloth, 
14s. 

Ephraemi Syri, Rabulae Episcopi Edesseni, Balaei, aliorumque, 
Opera Selecta. E Codd. Syriacis MSS. in Museo Britannico et Bibliotheca 
Bodleiana asservatis primus edidit J. J. Overbeck. 1865. 8vo. cloth, ll. is. 

A Latin translation of the above, by the same Editor. Preparing. 

Eusebii Pamphili Eclogae Propheticae. E. Cod. MS. nunc primum 

edidit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. 1842. 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d. 

Eusebii Pamphili Evangelicae Praeparationis Libri XV. Ad Codd. 
MSS. recensuit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. Tomi IV. 1843. 8vo. cloth, il. 10s. 



Printed at the Clarendon Press. 7 

Eusebii Pamphili Evangelicae Demonstrationis Libri X. Recensuit 
T. Gaisford, S.T.P. Tomi II. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 15s. 

Eusebii Pamphili contra Hieroclem et Marcelltun Libri. Recensuit 
T. Gaisford, S.T.P. 1852. 8vo. doth, 7s. 

Eusebii Pamphili Historia Ecclesiastica. Edidit E. Burton, S.T.P.R. 

1856. Svo. cloth, 8s. dd. 

Eusebii Pamphili Historia Ecclesiastica : Annotationes Variorum. 
Tomi II. 1842. 8vo. cloth, 17s. 

Evagrii Historia Ecclesiastica, ex recensione H. Valesii. 1844. Svo. 

cloth, 4s. 

Origenis Philosophumena ; sive omnium Haeresium Refutatio. E 
Codice Parisino nunc primum edidit Emmanuel Miller. 1851. 8vo. cloth, los. 

Patrum Apostolicorum, S. Clementis Romani, S. Ignatii, S. Polycarpi, 
quae supersunt. Edidit Guil. Jacobson, S.T.P.R. Tomi II. Fourth Edition. 1863. 
Svo. cloth, il. IS. 

Beliquiae Saerae secundi tertiique saeculi. Recensuit M. J. Routh, 
S.T.P. Tomi V. Second Edition: 1 846-1 848. Svo. cloth. Price reduced /rom 
2I. IIS. to il. 5s. 

Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Opuseula. Recensuit M. J. Routh, 
S.T.P. Tomi II. Third Edition. i8^S. 8yo. cloth. Price reduced from il. to los. 

Socratis Scholastici Historia Ecclesiastica. Gr. et Lat. Edidit R. 
Hussey, S.T.B. Tomi III. 1853. Svo. cloth. Price reduced from il. lis. 6d. to ll. is. 

Sozomeni Historia Ecclesiastica. Edidit R. Hussey, S.T.B. Tomi III. 

1859. 8vo. cloth. Price reduced from il. 6s. 6d. to ll. is. 

Theodoreti Ecclesiasticae Historiae Libri V. Recensuit T. Gaisford, 
S.T.P. 1854. 8vo. cloth, p. 6d. 

Theodoreti Graecarum AfFectionum Curatio. Ad Codices MSS. re- 
censuit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. 1839. Svo. cloth, 7s. 6d. 

Dowling (J. G.) Notitia Scriptorum SS. Patrum aliorumque vet. 
Eccles. Mon. quae in CoUectionibus Anecdotorum post annum Christi mdcc. 
in lucem editis continentur. 1839. Svo. cloth, 4s. 6d. 



ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOBY, BIOGRAPHY, &c. 

Baedae Historia Ecclesiastica. Edited, with English Notes, by 
George H. Moberly, M.A., Fellow of C.C.C, Oxford. 1869. crown Svo. cloth, 
I OS. 6d. 

Bingham's Antiquities of the Christian Church, and other Works. 

10 vols. 1855. Svo. cloth. Price reduced from t^l. 5s. to 3/. 3s. 

Burnet's History of the Reformation of the Church of England. 
A new Edition. Carefully revised, and the Records collated with the originals, 
by N. Pocock, M.A. With a Preface by the Editor. 7 vols. 1865. Svo. cloth, 
4/. 4s. 

Burnet's Life of Sir M. Hale, and Fell's Life of Dr. Hammond. 1856. 
small Svo. cloth. Price reduced from 5s. to 2s. 6d. 



8 Catalogue of Books 

Cardwell's Two Books of Common Prayer, set forth by authority 
in the Reign of King Edward VI, compared with each other. Third Edition. 
1852. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 

Cardwell's Doetimentary Annals of the Reformed Church of 
England ; being a Collection of Injunctions, Declarations, Orders, Articles of 
Inquiry, &c. from 1546 to 1716. 2 vols. 1843. 8vo. cloth, i8s. 

Cardwell's History of Conferences on the Book of Common Prayer 

from 1551 to 1690. Third Edition. 1849. ^'^°' cZo/j&, 7s. 6d. 

Cardwell's Synodalia. A Collection of Articles of Religion, Canons, 
and Proceedings of Convocation in the Province of Canterbury, from 1547 to 
1717. 2 vols. 1842. 8vo. cloth, 19s. 

Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents relating to Great Britain 
and Ireland. Edited, after Spelman and Wilkins, by A. W. Haddan, B.D., and 
"William Stubbs, M.A., Regius Professor of Modern History, Oxford. Vol. I. 
1869. Medium 8vo. cloth, il. is. 

Formularies of Faith set forth by the King's Authority during the 
Reign of Henry VIII. 1856. 8vo. cloth, 'js. 

Fuller's Church. History of Britain. Edited by J. S. Brewer, M.A. 
6 vols. 1845. 8vo. cloth, il. 19s. 

Gribson's Synodus Anglicana. Edited by E. Cardwell, D.D. 1854. 

8vo. cloth, 6s. 

Hussey's Rise of the Papal Power traced in three Lectures. 

Second Edition. 1863. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d. 

Inett's Origines Anglicanae (in continuation of Stillingfleet). 
Edited by J. Griffiths, M.A. 3 vols. 1855. 8vo. cloth. Price reduced from 
i/. IIS. dd. to 15s. 

John, Bishop of Ephesus. The Third Part of his Ecclesiastical 
History. [In Syriac] Now first edited by William Cureton, M.A. 1853. 4to. 
cloth, \l. I2S. 

The same, translated by R. Payne Smith, M.A. i860. 8vo. cloth, \os. 
Knight's Life of Dean Colet. 1823. 8vo. cloth, 'js. 6d. 

Le Neve's Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae. Corrected and continued from 
1 715 to 1853 by T. Duffus Hardy. 3 vols. 1854. 8vo. cloth. Price reduced from 
\l. I'js. 6d. to il. IS. 

Noelli (A.) Catechismus sive prima institutio disciplinaque Pietatis 
Christianae Latine explicata. Editio nova cura Guil. Jacobson, A.M. 1844. 
8vo. cloth, 5s. 6d. 

Prideaux's Connection of Sacred and Profane History. 2 vols. 1851. 

8vo. cloth, 10s. 

Primers put forth in the Reign of Henry VIIL 1848. 8vo. cloth, ^s. 

Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum. The Reformation of Eccle- 
siastical Laws, as attempted in the reigns of Henry VIII, Edward VI, and 
Elizabeth. Edited by E. Cardwell, D.D. 1850. 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d. 

Shirley's (W. W.) Some Account of the Church in the Apostolic 
Age. 1867. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d. 

Shuckford's Sacred and Profane History connected (in continuation 
of Prideaux). 2 vols. 1848. 8vo. cloth, los. 



Printed at the Clare^tdon Press. 9 

Stillingfleet's Origines Britannieie, with Lloyd's Historical Account 
of Church Government. Edited by T. P. Pantin, M.A. 2 vols. 1842. 8vo. 
cloth. Price reduced from 13s. to los. 

Strype's Works Complete, with a General Index. 27 vols. 1821- 
1843. 8vo. cloth, 7/. 13s. 6c?. Sold separately as follows: — 

Memorials of Cranmer. 2 vols. 1840. Svo. cloth, \\s. 

Life of Parker. 3 vols. 1828. 8vo. cloth, xds. 6d. 

Life of Grindal. 1821. Svo. cloth, ^s. 6d. 

Life of Whitgift. 3 vols. 1822. 8vo. cloth, 16s. 6d. 

Life of Aylmer. J820. Svo. cloth, ^s. 6d. 

Life of Cheke. 182 1. Svo. cloth, ^s. 6d. 

Life of Smith. 1826. Svo. cloth, ^s. 6d. 

Ecclesiastical Memorials. 6 vols. 1S22. Svo. cloth, \l. 13J. 

Annals of the Reformation. 7 vols. 1824. Svo. cloth, il. y. 6d. 

General Index. 2 vols. 182S. Svo. cloth, its. 

Stubbs's (W.) Registrum Sacrum Anglicanum. An attempt to exhibit 

the course of Episcopal Succession in England. 1858. small 4to. cloth, 8s. 6d. 

Sylloge Confessionum sub tempus Reformandae Ecclesiae editarum. 
Subjiciuntur Catechismus Heidelbergensis et Canones Synodi Dordrechtanae. 
1827. Svo. cloth, 8s. 

Walton's Lives of Donne, Wotton, Hooker, &c. 1824. Svo. cloth, 
6s. 6d. 

ENGLISH THEOLOG-Y. 

Beveridge's Discourse upon_^the XXXIX Articles. The Third complete 

Edition. 1847. Svo. cloth, Ss. 

Bilson on the Perpetual Government of Christ's Church, with a Bio- 
graphical Notice by R. Eden, M.A. 1842. Svo. cloth, \s. 

Biseoe's Boyle Lectures on the Acts of the Apostles. 1840. Svo. cloth, 

9s. (>d. 

Bull's Works, with Nelson's Life. By E. Burton, D.D. A new 
Edition. 1846. 8 vols. Svo. cloth, il. gs. 

Burnet's Exposition of the XXXIX Articles. 1S46. Svo. cloth, ^s. 

Burton's (Edward) Testimonies of the Ante-Nicene Fathers to the 
Divinity of Christ. Second Edition. 1829. Svo. cloth, 7s. 

Burton's (Edward) Testimonies of the Ante-Nicene Fathers to the 
Doctrine of the Trinity and of the Divinity of the Holy Ghost. 1S51. Svo. cloth, 
2s. 6d. 

Butler's Works, with an Index to the Analogy. 2 vols. 1849. ^vo. 

cloth, IIS. 

Butler's Analogy of Religion. 1833. i2mo. cloth, 2s. 6d. 

Chandler's Critical History of the Life of David. 1S53. Svo. cloth, 
8s. 6d. 

Chillingworth's Works. 3 vols. 183S. Svo. cloth, i/. is. 6d. 



I o Catalogue of Books 

Clergyman's Instructor. Sixth Edition. 1855. 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d. 

Comber's Companion to the Temple ; or a Help to Devotion in the use 
of the Common Prayer. 7 vols. 1841. 8vo. cloth, il. lis. 6d. 

Cranmer's "Works. Collected and arranged by H. Jenkyns, M.A., Fellow 
of Oriel College. 4 vols. 1834. 8vo. cloth, il. los. 

Enchiridion Theologicum Anti-Romanum. 

Vol. I. Jeremy Taylor's Dissuasive from Popery, and Treatise on the Real 

Presence. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 8s. 
Vol. II. Barrow on the Supremacy of the Pope, with his Discourse on the 

Unity of the Church. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 'js. 6d. 
Vol. III. Tracts selected from Wake, Patrick, Stillingfleet, Clagett, and others. 

1837. 8vo. cloth, lis. 

[Fell's] Paraphrase and Annotations on the Epistles of St. Paul. 1852. 

8vo. cloth, 'JS. 

Greswell's Harmonia Evangeliea. Ei/th Edition. 1856. 8vo. cloth, 
9s. 6J. 

G-reswell's Prolegomena ad Harmoniam Evangelicam. 1840. 8vo. 
cloth, 9s. 6J. 

Greswell's Dissertations on the Principles and Arrangement of a 
Harmony of the Gospels. 5 vols. 1837. 8vo. cloth, '3/. 3s. 

Hall's (Bp.) Works. A new Edition, by Philip Wynter, D.D. 10 vols. 

1863. 8vo. cloth. Price reduced from ^l. 5s. to 3Z. 3s. 

Hammond's Paraphrase and Annotations on the New Testament. 

4 vols. 1845. 8vo. cloth. Price reduced from \l. los. to il. 

Hammond's Paraphrase on the Book of Psalms. 2 vols. 1850. 8vo. 

cloth. Price reduced from ll. is. to los. • 

Heurtley's Collection of Creeds. 1858. 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d. 

Homilies appointed to be read in Churches. Edited by J. Griffiths, 

M.A. 1859. 8vo. cloth. Price reduced from- 10s. 6d. to 'js. 6d. 

Hooker's Works, with his Life by Walton, arranged by John Keble, 
M.A. Fifth Edition. 1865. 3 vols. 8vo. cloth, il. lis. 6d. 

Hooker's Works ; the text as arranged by John Keble, M.A. 2 vols. 

1865. 8vo. cloth, lis. 

Hooper's (Bp. George) Works. 2 vols. 1855. Svo. cloth, 8s. 
Jackson's (Dr. Thomas) Works. 12 vols. 1844. 8vo. cloth, 3/. 6s. 
Jewel's Works. Edited by R, W. Jelf, D.D. 8 vols. 1847. 8vo. 

cloth. Price reduced from 2/. los. to ll. los. 

Patrick's Theological Works. 9 vols. 1859. 8vo. cloth. Price 

reduced from 3Z. 14s. 6^. to ll. is. 

Pearson's Exposition of the Creed. Revised and corrected by E. 
Burton, D.D. Fifth Edition. 1864. 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d. 

Pearson's Minor Theological Works. Now first collected, with a Memoir 
of the Author, Notes, and Index, by Edward Churton, M.A. 2 vols. 1844. 
Svo. cloth. Price reduced from 14s. to 10s. 



Printed at the Clarendon Press. 1 1 

Sanderson's Works. Edited by W. Jacobson, D.D. 6 vols. 1854. 8vo. 

cloth. Price reduced from il. igs. to il. los. 

South's Sermons. 5 vols. 1842. 8vo. clofh. Price reduced from 
2I. 10s. 6d. to \l. los. 

Stanhope's Paraphrase and Comment upon the Epistles and Gospels. 

A new Edition. 2 vols. 1851. 8vo. cloth. Price reduced from l8s. to los. 

Stillingfleet's Origines Saerae. 2 vols. 1837. 8vo. cloth, 9J. 

Stillingfleet's Rational Account of the Grounds of Protestant Religion ; 
being a vindication of Abp. Laud's Relation of a Conference, &c. 2 vols. 1844. 
8vo. cloth, IDS. 

Wall's History of Infant Baptism, with Gale's Reflections, and Wall's 
Defence. A new Edition, by Henry Cotton, D.C.L. 2 vols. 1862. 8vo. cloth, 

I/. IS. 

Waterland's Works, with Life, by Bp. Van Mildert. A new Edition, 
with copious Indexes. 6 vols. 1857. 8vo. cloth, 2I. lis. 

Waterland's Review of the Doctrine of the Eucharist, with a Preface by 
the present Bishop of London. 1868. crown 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d. 

Wheatly's Illustration of the Book of Common Prayer. A new Edition. 
1846. 8vo. cloth, 5s. 

Wyclif. A Catalogue of the Original Works of John Wyclif, by W. W. 
Shirley, D.D. 1865. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d. 

Wyclif. Trialogus. With the Supplement now first edited. By 
Gotthardus Lechler. 1869. 8vo. cloth. 14s. 

Wyclif. Sermons and Select English Works. By T. Arnold, M.A. 

In the Press. 



ENGLISH HISTORICAL AND DOCUMENTARY WORKS. 

Two of the Saxon Chronicles parallel, with Supplementary Extracts 
from the Others. Edited, with Introduction, Notes, and a Glossarial Index, by 
J. Earle, M.A. 1865. 8vo. cloth, i6s. 

Magna Carta, a careful Reprint. Edited by W. Stubbs, M.A., Regius 
Professor of Modern History. 1868. 4to. stitched, is. 

Britten, a Treatise upon the Common Law of England, composed by 
order of King Edward I. The French Text carefully revised, with an English 
Translation, Introduction, and Notes, by F. M. Nichols, M.A. 2 vols. i«65. 
royal 8vo. cloth, il. i6s. 

Burnet's History of His Own Time, with the suppressed Passages and 
Notes. 6 vols. 1833. 8vo. cloth, 2I. los. 

Burnet's History of James II, with additional Notes. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 
gs. 6d. 

Burnet's Lives of James and William Dukes of Hamilton. 1852, 8vo. 

cloth, 7s. 6d. 

Carte's Life of James Duke of Ormond. A new Edition, carefully com- 
pared with the original MSS. 6 vols. 1851. Bvo. cloth. Price reduced from 2I, 6s. 
to il. 5s. 



12 Catalogue of Books 

Casautaoni Ephemerides, cum praefatione et notis J. Russell, S.T.P, 

Tomi II. 1850. 8vo. cloth, 15s. 

Clarendon's (Edw. Earl of) History of the Rebellion and Civil Wars 
in England. To which are subjoined the Notes of Bishop Warburton. 7 vols. 
1849. medium 8vo. cloth, 2I. los. 

Clarendon's (Edw. Earl of) History of the Rebellion and Civil Wars in 

England. 7 vols. 1839. i8mo. cloth, il. is. 

Clarendon's (Edw. Earl of) History of the Rebellion and Civil Wars in 

England. Also His Life, written by Himself, in which is included a Continuation 
of his History of the Grand Rebellion. With copious Indexes. In one volume, 
royal 8vo. 1S42. cloth, il. 2s. 

Clarendon's (Edw. Earl of) Life, including a Continuation of his 
History. 2 vols. 1857. medium Svo. cloih, il. 2s. 

Clarendon's (Edw. Earl of) Life, and Continuation of his History. 
3 vols. 1827. 8vo. cloth, 16s. 6d. 

Calendar of the Clarendon State Papers preserved in the Bodleian 
Library. Vol. II. From the Death of Charles I, 1649, to the end of the year 
1654. Edited by W. D. Macray, M.A. 1869. Svo. cloth, 16s. 

Freeman's (E. A.) History of the Norman Conquest of England : its 

Causes and Results. Vols. I. and II. Svo. cloth, each i8s. 
Vol. III. Svo. cloth, il. IS. 

Kennett's Parochial Antiquities. 2 vols. 18 18. 4to. cM/i. Price 

reduced from J I. 14s. to il. 

Lloyd's Prices of Corn in Oxford, 1583-1830. Svo. sewed, \s. 
Luttrell's (Narcissus) Diary. A Brief Historical Relation of State 

Affairs, 1678-1714. 6 vols. 1857. Svo. cloth. Price reduced from 3Z. 3s. to il. 4s. 

May's History of the Long Parliament. 1854. Svo. cloi/i, 6s. 6d. 
Rogers's History of Agriculture and Prices in England, a.d. 12 59- 1400. 

2 vols. 1866. Svo. cloth, 2I. 2S. 

Sprigg's England's Recovery; being the History of the Army under 
Sir Thomas Fairfax. A new Edition. 1854. Svo. cloth, 6s. 

Whitelock's Memorials of English Affairs from 1625 to 1660. 4 vols. 
1853. Svo. cloth, il. los. 

Enactments in Parliament, specially concerning the Universities of 
Oxford and Cambridge. Collected and arranged by J. Griffiths, M.A, 1869. Svo. 
cloth, 1 2s. 

Ordinances and Statutes [for Colleges and Halls] framed or approved 
by the Oxford University Commissioners. 1863. Svo. cloth, 12s. 

Sold separately (except for Exeter, All Souls, Brasenose, Corpus, and Magdalen 
Hall) at IS. each. 

Statuta Universitatis Oxoniensis, 1869. 8vo. clo/A, ^s. 

Index to Wills proved in the Court of the Chancellor of the University 
of Oxford, &c. Compiled by J. Griffiths, M.A. 1S62. royal Svo. cloth, 3s. 6d. 

Catalogue of Oxford Graduates from 1659 to 1850, 1851. 8vo. 
cloth. Price reduced from 1 2s. 6d. to 'js. 6d. 



Printed at the Clarendon Press. 1 3 



CHRONOLOGY, GEOGRAPHY, &c. 

Clinton's Fasti Helleniei. The Civil and Literary Chronology of 
Greece, from the LVIth to the CXXIIIrd Olympiad. Third Edition. 1841. 4to. 
cloth, \l. 14s. 6(f. 

Clinton's Fasti Helleniei. The Civil and Literary Chronology of 
Greece, from the CXXIVth Olympiad to the Death of Augustus. Second Edition. 
1S51. 4to. cloth, il. I2S. 

Clinton's Epitome of the Fasti Helleniei. 1 85 1 . 8vo. cloth, 6s. dd. 

Clinton's Fasti Romani. The Civil and Literary Chronology of Rome 
and Constantinople, from the Death of Augustus to the Death of Heraclius. 
2 vols. 1845, 1850. 4to. cloth, 3/. 9s. 

Clinton's Epitome of the Fasti Romani. 1854. Svo. cloth, 'js. 

Cramer's Geographical and Historical Description of Asia Minor. 
2 vols. 1832. 8vo. cloth, IIS. 

Cramer's Map of Asia Minor, 15^-. 

Cramer's Map of Ancient and Modern Italy, on two sheets, 15^-. 

Cramer's Description of Ancient Greece. 3 vols. 1828. Svo. cloth, 
1 6s. 6d. 

Cramer's Map of Ancient and Modern Greece, on two sheets, 15^. 

Greswell's Fasti Temporis Catholici. 4 vols. 1852. Svo. cloth, il. \os. 

Greswell's Tables to Fasti, 4to., and Introduction to Tables, Svo. 

cloth, 15s. 

Greswell's Origines Kalendariae Italicae. 4 vols. 1854. Svo. cloth, 

il. 2S. 

Greswell's Origines Kalendariae Hellenicae. The History of the Pri- 
mitive Calendar among the Greeks, before and after the Legislation of Solon. 
6 vols. 1862. Svo. cloth, 4?. 4s. 

PHILOSOPHICAL WORKS, AND GENERAL 
LITERATURE. 

Bacon's Novum Organum, edited, with English notes, by G. W. Kitchin, 

M.A. 1855. Svo. cloth, 9s. 6 J. 

Bacon's Novum Organum, translated by G. W. Kitchin, M.A. 1855. 
Svo. cloth, 9s. dd. 

The Works of George Berkeley, D.D., formerly Bishop of Cloyne, 

Collected and edited, from pubUshed and unpublished sources, with Prefaces, 
Notes, Dissertations, and an Account of his Life and Philosophy, by Alexander 
Campbell Fraser, M.A., Professor of Logic and Metaphysics in the University of 
Edinburgh. In the Press. 

Chaucer's Works. A new Edition, by the Rev. John Earle, M.A., 
formerly Professor of Anglo-Saxon, Oxford. Preparing. 

The Wealth of Nations, by Adam Smith, LL.D. A new Edition, with 
Notes, by J. E. Thorold Rogers, M.A., formerly Professor of Political Economy, 
Oxford. 2 vols. Svo. cloth, il. is. Just published. 



14 Catalogue of Books 



MATHEMATICS, PHYSICAL SCIENCE, &c. 

An Account of Vesuvius, by John Phillips, M.A., F.R.S., Professor 
of Geology, Oxford. 1869. crown 8vo. cloth, los. 6i. 

Synopsis of the Pathological Series in the Oxford Museum. By H. W. 
Acland, M.D., F.R.S., Regius Professor of Medicine, Oxford. 1867. 8vo. cloth, 
2s. 6d. 

Arcliiniedis quae supersunt omnia cum Eutocii commentariis ex recen- 
sione Joseph! Torelli, cum novl, versione Latina. 1792. folio, cloth, il. 5s. 

Bradley's Miscellaneous Works and Correspondence. With an Ac- 
count of Harriot's Astronomical Papers. 1832. 4to. cloth, 17s. 

Reduction of Bradley's Observations by Dr. Busch. 1838. 4to. cloth, 3s. 

Dautoeny's Introduction to the Atomic Theory. Second Edition, greatly 
enlarged. 1850. i6mo. cloth, ()s. 

Thesaurus Entomologicus Hopeianus, or a Description, with Plates, 
of the rarest Insects in the Collection given to the University by the Rev. William 
Hope. By J. O. Westwood, M.A., Hope Professor of Zoology. Preparing. 

Treatise on Infinitesimal Calculus. By Bartholomew Price, M.A., 
F.R.S., Professor of Natural Philosophy, Oxford. 
Vol.1. Differential Calculus. Second Edition. 1858. 8vo. cloth, 14s. 6rf. 
Vol. II. Integral Calculus, Calculus of Variations, and Differential Equations. 

Second Edition. 1865. 8vo. cloth, i8s. 
Vol. III. Statics, including Attractions ; Dynamics of a Material Particle. 

Second Edition. 1868. 8vo. cloth, i6s. 
Vol. IV. Dynamics of Material Systems ; together with a Chapter on Theo- 
retical Dynamics, by W. F. Donkin, M.A., F.R.S. 1862. 8vo. cloth, i6s. 

Rigaud's Correspondence of Scientific Men of the 17 th Century, with 
Index by A. de Morgan. 2 vols. 1841-1862. 8vo. cloth, i8s. 6d. 



BIBLIOGBAPHY. 

Elbert's Bibliographical Dictionary, translated from the German. 4 vols. 
1837. 8vo. cloth, il. los. 

Cotton's List of Editions of the Bible in English. Second Edition, cor- 
rected and enlarged. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 8s. 6 J. 

Cotton's Typographical Gazetteer. Second Edition. 1831. 8vo. cloth, 

I2S. dd. 

Cotton's Typographical Gazetteer, Second Series. 1866. 8vo. cloth, 
12s. 6d. 

Cotton's Rhemes and Doway. An attempt to shew what has been done 
by Roman Catholics for the diffusion of the Holy Scriptures in English. 1855. 
8vo. cloth, 9s. 



Printed at the Clarendon Press. 1 5 



BODLEIAN LIBRARY CATALOGUES, &c. 

Catalogus Codd. MSS. Orientalium Bibliothecae Bodleianae : 
Pars I, a J. Uri. 1788. fol. los. 
Partis II Vol. I, ab A. NicoU, A.M. 1821. fol. ids. 
Partis II Vol. II, Arabicos complectens, ab E. B. Pusey, S.T.B. 1835. fol. i/. 

Catalogus MSS. qui ab E. D. Clarke comparati in Bibl. Bodl. adservantur : 

Pars prior. Inseruntur Scholia inedita in Platonem et in Carmina Gregorii 

Naz. 181 2. 4to. 5s. 
Pars posterior, Orientales complectens, ab A. NicoU, A.M. 1814. 4to. 2s. 6d. 

Catalogus Codd. MSS. et Impressorum cum notis MSS. olim D'Orvillia- 
norum, qui in Bibl. Bodl. adservantur. 1806. 4to. 2s. 6cf. 

Catalogus MSS. Borealium praecipue Islandicae Originis, a Finno Magno 
Islando. 1832. 4to. 4s. 

Catalogus Codd. MSS, Bibliothecae Bodleianae : — 

Pars I. Codices Graeci, ab H. O. Coxe, A.M. 1853. 4to. i/. 

Partis II. Fasc. I. Codices Laudiani, ab H. O. Coxe, A.M. 1858. 4to. i/. 

Pars III. Codices Graeci et Latini Canoniciani, ab H. O. Coxe, A.M. 1854. 

4to. il. 
Pars IV. Codices T. Tanneri, ab A. Hackman, A.M. 1060. 4to. 12s. 
Pars V. Codicum R. Rawlinson classes duae priores, a Guil. D. Macray, A.M. 

1862. 4to. I2S. 
Pars VI. Codices Syriaci, a R. P. Smith, A.M. 1864. 4to. \l. 
Pars VII. Codices Aethiopici, ab A. Dillmann, Ph. Doct. 1848, 4to. (is.(>d. 
Pars VIII. Codices Sanscritici, a Th. Aufrecht, A.M. 1859-1864. 410. \l. los. 

Catalogo di Codici MSS. Canoniciani Italici, compilato dal Conte A. 
Mortara. 1864. 4to. ics. 6c?. 

Catalogus Librorum Impressorum Bibliothecae Bodleianae. Tomi IV. 
1843 to 1850. fol. 4?. 

Catalogus Dissertationum Academicarum quibus nuper aucta est Biblio- 
theca Bodleiana. 1834. fol. 7s. 

Catalogue of Books bequeathed to the Bodleian Library by R. Gough, 
Esq. 1814. 4to. 15s. 

Catalogue of Early English Poetry and other Works illustrating the British 
Drama, collected by Edmond Malone, Esq. 1835. fol. 4s. 

Catalogue of the Printed Books and Manuscripts bequeathed to the 
Bodleian Library by Francis Douce, Esq. 1840. fol. 15s. 

Catalogue of the Manuscripts bequeathed to the University of Oxford 
by Elias Ashmole. By W. H. Black. 1845. 4to. \l. los. 

Index to the above, by W. D. Macray, M.A, 1867. 4to. \os. 

Catalogue of a Collection of Early Newspapers and Essayists presented 
to the Bodleian Library by the late Rev. F. W. Hope. 1865. 8vo. 7s. dd. 

Catalogus Codd. MSS. qui in CoUegiis Aulisque Oxoniensibus hodie ad- 
servantur. Confecit H. O. Coxe, A.M. Tomi II. 1852. 4to. 2/. 

Catalogus Codd. MSS. in Bibl. Aed. Christi ap. Oxon. Curavit G. W. 

Kitchin, A.M. 1867. 4to. ()s. 6d. 



Clarmtrntt "BxtUB Btxm. 



The Delegates of the Clarendon Press having under- 
taken the publication of a series of works, chiefly edu- 
cational, and entitled the €hxtniiDn '^X^BB ^Jtxm^ have 
published, or have in preparation, the following. 

TAose to which prices are attached are already published ; the others are 

in preparation. 

I. GREEK AND LATIN CLASSICS, &c. 

Greek Verbs, Irregidar and Defective ; their forms, meaning, and 
quantity ; embracing all the Tenses used by Greek writers, with reference to the 
passages in which they are found. By W. Veitch'. New and revised Edition. 
Ext. fcap. 8vo. clotb, 8s. 6d. 

The Elements of Greek Accentuation (for Schools) : abridged from 
his larger work by H. W. Chandler, M.A., Waynflete Professor of Moral and 
Metaphysical Philosophy, Oxford. Ext. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d. 

Aeschines in Ctesiphontem and Demosthenes de Corona. With 
Introduction and Notes. By G. A. Simcox, M. A., and W. H. Simcox, M. A., 
Fellows of Queen's College, Oxford. 

Aristotle's Polities. By W. L. Newman, M.A., Fellow and Lecturer 
of Balliol College, and Reader in Ancient History, Oxford. 

The Golden Treasury of Ancient Greek Poetry ; being a Collection of 
the finest passages in the Greek Classic Poets, with Introductory Notices and 
Notes. By R. S. Wright, M.A., Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford. Ext. fcap. 8vo. 
cloth, 8s. 6d. 

A Golden Treasury of Greek Prose, being a collection of the finest 
passages in the principal Greek Prose Writers, with Introductory Notices and 
Notes. By R. S. Wright, M.A., Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford ; and J. E. L. 
Shadwell, B.A., Senior Student of Christ Church. In the Press. 

Homer. Iliad. By D. B. Monro, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Oriel 
College, Oxford. 

Homer. Odyssey, Books I-XII. By W. W. Merry, M.A., Fellow and 
Lecturer of Lincoln College, Oxford ; and the late James Riddell, M.A., Fellow 
of Balliol College, Oxford. 

Also a small edition for Schools. 

Homer. Odyssey, Books XIII-XXIV. By Robinson Ellis, M.A., Fellow 
of Trinity College, Oxford. 

Plato. Selections (for Schools). With Notes, by B. Jowett, M.A., Regius 
Professor of Greek; and J. Purves, M.A., Fellow and Lecturer of Balliol College, 
Oxford. 



Clarendon Press Series. 17 

Sophocles. Oedipus Rex : Dindorf s Text, with Notes by the Ven. 
Archdeacon Basil Jones, M.A., formerly Fellow of University College, Oxford. 
Second Edition. Ext. fcap. 8vo. limp cloth, is. 6d. 

Sophocles. By Lewis Campbell, M.A., Professor of Greek, St. 
Andrews, formerly Fellow of Queen's College, Oxford. 

Theocritus (for Schools). With Notes, by H. Snow, M.A., Assistant 
Master at Eton College, formerly Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge. 
Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d. 

Xenophon. Selections (for Schools). With Notes and Maps, by J. S. 
Phillpotts, B.C.L., Assistant Master in Rugby School, formerly Fellow of New 
College, Oxford. 

Caesar. The Commentaries (for Schools). Part I. The Gallic War, 
with Notes, &c., by Charles E. Moberly, M.A., Assistant Master in Rugby 
School; formerly Scholar of Balliol College, Oxford. 

Also, to follow : Part II. The Civil War : by the same Editor. 

Cicero's Philippic Orations. With Notes, by J. R. King, M. A., 
formerly Fellow and Tutor of Merton College, Oxford. Demy 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d. 

Cicero pro Cluentio. With Introduction and Notes. By W. Ramsay, 
M.A. Edited by G. G. Ramsay, M.A., Professor of Humanity, Glasgow. Ext. 
fcap. Svo. cloth, 3s. ()d. 

Cicero. Selection of interesting and descriptive passages. With Notes. 
By Henry Walford, M.A., Wadham College, Oxford, Assistant Master at Hailey- 
bury College. In three Parts. Extra fcap. Svo. cloth, 4s. 6d. 

Also sold separately : 
Part I. Anecdotes from Grecian and Roman History. Cloth, is. 6d. 
Part II. Omens and Dreams : Beauties of Nature. Cloth, is. 6d. 
Part III. Rome's Rule of her Provinces. Cloth, is. 6c?. 

Cicero. Select Letters. By Albert Watson, M.A., Fellow and Tutor 
of Brasenose College, Oxford. In the Press. 

Cicero de Oratore. With Introduction and Notes. By A. S. Wilkins, 
M.A., Professor of Latin, Owens College, Manchester. 

Cornelius Nepos. With Notes, by Oscar Browning, M.A., Fellow of 
King's College, Cambridge, and Assistant Master at Eton College. Extra fcap. Svo. 
cloth, 2s. 6d. 

Cicero and Pliny. Select Epistles (for Schools). With Notes by 
C. E. Prichard, M.A., formerly Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford. 

Horace. With Introduction and Notes. By Edward C. Wickham, 
M.A., Fellow and Tutor of New College, Oxford. 
Also a small edition for Schools. 

Livy, Books I-X. By J. R. Seeley, M.A., Fellow of Christ's College, 

and Regius Professor of Modem History, Cambridge. In the Press. 
Also a small edition for Schools. 

Ovid. Selections for the use of Schools. With Introductions and 
Notes, and an Appendix on the Roman Calendar. By W. Ramsay, M.A. 
Edited by G. G. Ramsay, M.A., Professor of Humanity, Glasgow. Ext. fcap. Svo. 
cloth, Ss. 6d. 



i8 Clarendon Press Series, 

Fragments and Specimens of Early Latin. With Introduction, 
Notes, and Illustrations, By John Wordsworth, M. A., Fellow of Brasenose 
College, Oxford. 

Selections from tlie less known Latin Poets. By North Pinder, 
M.A., formerly Fellow of Trinity College, Oxford. Demy 8vo. cloth, 15s. 

Passages for Translation into Latin. For the use of Passmen and 
others. Selected by J. Y. Sargent, M.A., Tutor, formerly Fellow, of Magdalen 
College, Oxford. Second Edition. Ext. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6flf. 



II. MENTAL AND MOEAL PHILOSOPHY. 

The Elements of Deductive Logic, designed mainly for the use of 

Junior Students in the Universities. By T. Fowler, M.A., Fellow and Tutor 
of Lincoln College, Oxford. Third Edition, with a Collection of Examples. 
Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6cf. 

The Elements of Inductive Logic, designed mainly for the use of 

Students in the Universities. By the same Author. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, (>&. 
Just Published. 

A Manual of Political Economy, for the use of Schools. By J. E. 
Thorold Rogers, M.A., formerly Professor of Political Economy, Oxford. Second 
Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d. 



III. MATHEMATICS, &c. 

An Elementary Treatise on Quaternions. By P. G. Tait, M.A., Pro- 
fessor of Natural Philosophy in the University of Edinburgh ; formerly Fellow of 
St. Peter's College, Cambridge. Demy 8vo. cloth, 12s. 6d. 

Book-keeping. By R. G. C. Hamilton, Accountant to the Edu- 
cation Committee of the Privy Council, and John Ball (of the Firm of Messrs. 
Quilter, Ball, and Co.), Examiners in Book-keeping for the Society of Arts' 
Examination. Second Edition. Extra fcap. Svo. limp cloth, is. 6d. 

A Course of Lectures on Pure Geometry. By Henry J. Stephen 
Smith, M.A., F.R.S., Fellow of Balliol College, and Savilian Professor of Geometry 
in the University of Oxford. 

A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism. By J. Clerk Maxwell, 
M.A., F.R.S., formerly Professor of Natural Philosophy, King's College, London. 

Acoustics. By W. F. Donkin, M.A., F.R.S., Savilian Professor of Astro- 
nomy, Oxford. Just ready. 

A Series of Elementary Worh is being arranged, and will shortly be announced. 

IV. HISTORY. 

A Manual of Ancient History. By George Rawlinson, M.A., Camden 
Professor of Ancient History, formerly Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford. Demy 
8vo. cloth, 14s. Just Published. 

A History of Germany and of the Empire, down to the close of the 
Middle Ages. By J. Bryce, B.C.L., Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford. 

A History of Germany, from the Reformation. By Adolphus W. 
Ward, M.A., Fellow of St. Peter's College, Cambridge, Professor of History, 
Owens College, Manchester. 



Clarendon Press Series. 19 

A History of British India. By S. W. Owen, M.A., Lee's Reader in 
Law and History, Christ Church, and Reader in Indian Law in the University of 
Oxford. 

A History of Greece. By E. A. Freeman, M.A., formerly Fellow of 
Trinity College, Oxford. 

A Constitutional History of England. By W, Stubbs, M. A., 
Regius Professor of Modern Histoiy in the University of Oxford. 

A History of France. By G. W. Kitchin, M.A., formerly Censor 
of Christ Church. 

V. LAW. 

Commentaries on Roman Law; from the original and the best modern 
sources. By H. J. Roby, M.A., formerly Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge; 
Professor of Law at University College, London. 2 vols. Demy.Svo. 

VI. PHYSICAL SCIENCE. 

Natural Philosophy. In four Volumes. By Sir W. Thomson, LL.D., 
D.C.L., F.R.S., Professor of Natural Philosophy, Glasgow ; and P. G. Tait, M.A., 
Professor of Natural Philosophy, Edinburgh; formerly Fellows of St. Peter's 
College, Cambridge. Vol. I. 8vo. cloth, il. 5s. 

By the same Authors, a smaller Work on the same subject, forming 
a complete Introduction to it, so far as it can be carried out with Elementary 
Geometry and Algebra. In the Press. 

Descriptive Astronomy. A Handbook for the General Reader, and 

also for practical Observatory work. With 224 illustrations and numerous tables. 
By G. F. Chambers, F.R.A.S., Barrister-at-Law. Demy 8vo. 856 pp., cloth, il. is. 

Chemistry for Students. By A. W. Williamson, Phil. Doc, F.R.S., 

Professor of Chemistry, University College, London. A new Edition, with Solutions. 
Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 8s. 6d. 

A Treatise on Heat, with numerous Woodcuts and Diagrams. By 
Balfour Stewart, LL.D., F.R.S., Director of the Observatory at Kew. Extra 
fcap. 8vo. cloth, 'js. 6d. 

Forms of Animal Life. By G. RoUeston, M.D., F.R.S., Linacre Pro- 
fessor of Physiology, Oxford. Illustrated by Descriptions and Drawings of 
Dissections. Just ready. 

Exercises in Practical Chemistry. By A. G. Vernon Harcourt, 
M.A., F.R.S., Senior Student of Christ Church, and Lee's Reader in Chemistry ; 
and H. G. Madan, M.A., Fellow of Queen's College, Oxford. 

Series I. Qualitative Exercises. Crown Svo. cloth, 'js. 6d. 

Series II. Quantitative Exercises. 

The Valley of the Thames; its Physical Geography and Geology. 
By John Phillips, M.A., F.R.S., Professor of Geology, Oxford. In the Press. 

Geology. By J. Phillips, M.A., F.R.S., Professor of Geology, Oxford. 

Mechanics. By Bartholomew Price, M.A., F.R.S., Sedleian Professor 
of Natural Philosophy, Oxford. 

Optics. By R. B. Clifton, M.A., F.R.S., Professor of Experimental 

Philosophy, Oxford ; formerly Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge. 

Electricity. By W. Esson, M.A., F.R.S., Fellow and Mathematical 
Lecturer of Merton College, Oxford. 



20 Clarendon Press Series. 

Crystallography. By M. H. N. Story-Maskelyne, M.A., Professor of 

Mineralogy, Oxford ; and Deputy Keeper in the Department of Minerals, British 
Museum. 

Mineralogy. By the same Author. 

Physiological Physics. By G. Griffith, M.A., Jesus College, Oxford, 
Assistant Secretary to the British Association, and Natural Science Master at 
Harrow School. 

Magnetism. 



VII. ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATUBE. 

A First Reading Book. By Marie Eichens of Berlin ; and edited by 

Anne J. Clough. Extra fcap. 8vo. stiff covers, 4c?. 

Oxford Beading Book, Part I. For Little Children. Extra fcap. 8vo. 

stff covers, 6d. 

Oxford Reading Book, Part II. For Junior Classes. Extra fcap. 8vo. 

stiff covers, 6d. 

On the Principles of Grammar. By E. Thring, M.A., Head Master 
of Uppingham School. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d. 

Grammatical Analysis, designed to serve as an Exercise and Compo- 
sition Book in the English Language. By E. Thring, M.A., Head Master of 
Uppingham School. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d. 

Specimens of Early English; being a Series of Extracts from the 
most important English Authors, Chronologically arranged, illustrative of the 
progress of the English Language and its Dialectic varieties, from a.d. 1250 to 
A.D. 1400. With Grammatical Introduction, Notes, and Glossary. By R. Morris, 
Editor of " The Story of Genesis and Exodus," &c. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 
7s. 6d. 

The Vision of William concerning Piers the Plowman, by 

William Langland. Edited, vi^ith Notes, by W. W. Skeat, M.A., formerly Fellow 
of Christ's College, Cambridge. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d. 

The Philology of the English Tongue. By J. Earle, M.A., formerly 
Fellow of Oriel College, and Professor of Anglo-Saxon, Oxford. In the Press. 

Typical Selections from the best English Authors from the Sixteenth 
to the Nineteenth Century, (to serve as a higher Reading Book,) with Intro- 
ductory Notices and Notes, being a Contribution towards a History of English 
Literature. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. ()d. Just Published. 

Specimens of the Scottish Language ; being a Series of Annotated 

Extracts illustrative of the Literature and Philology of the Lowland Tongue from 
the Fourteenth to the Nineteenth Century. With Introduction and Glossary. 
By A. H. Burgess, M.A. 

See also XI. below for other English Classics. 



VIII. FRENCH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE. 

Brachet's Historical Grammar of the French Language. Trans,- 
lated into English by G. W. Kitchin, M.A,, formerly Censor of Christ Church. 
Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d. 

Corneille's Cinna, and Moliere's Les Femmes Savantes. Edited, with 
Introduction and Notes, by Gustave Masson. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d. 



Clarendon Press Series. 21 

Racine's Andromaque, and Corneille's Le Menteur. With Louis 
Racine's Life of his Father. By the same Editor. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6c?. 

Moli^re's Les Fourberies de Scapin, and Racine's Athalie. With 
Voltaire's Life of Molifere. By the same Editor. In the Press. 

Selections from the Correspondence of Madame de Sevigne and her 
chief Contemporaries. Intended more especially for Girls' Schools. By the same 
Editor. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 

Voyage autour de ma Chambre, by Xavier de Maistre ; Ourika, by 
Madame de Duras ; La Dot de Suzette, by Fievee ; Les Jumeaux de I'Hotel 
Corneille, by Edmond About; M^saventures d'un Ecolier, by Rodolplie 
Topflfer. By the same Editor. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d. 

A French Grammar. A complete Theory of the French Language, 
with the rules in French and English, and numerous Examples to serve as first 
Exercises in the Language. By Jules Bue, Honorary M.A. of Oxford; Tay- 
lorian Teacher of French, Oxford ; Examiner in the Oxford Local Examinations 
from 1858. 

A French Grammar Test. A Book of Exercises on French Grammar ; 
each Exercise being preceded by Grammatical Questions. By the same Author. 

Exercises in Translation No. i, from French into English, with 
general rules on Ti-anslation ; and containing Notes, Hints, and Cautions, founded 
on a comparison of the Grammar and Genius of the two Languages. By the same 
Author. 

Exercises in Translation No. 2, from English into French, on the 
same plan as the preceding book. By the same Author. 

IX. GERMAN LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE. 

Goethe's Egmont. With a Life of Goethe, &c. By Dr. Buchheim, 
Professor of the German Language and Literature in King's College, London; 
and Examiner in German to the University of London. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 

Schiller's Wilhelm Tell. With a Life of Schiller; an historical and 
critical Introduction, Arguments, and a complete Commentary. By the same 
Editor. In the Press. 

Lessing's Minna von Barnhelm. A Comedy. With a Life of Lessing, 

Critical Commentary, &c. By the same Editor. 

X. ART, (fee. 

A Handbook of Pictorial Art. By R. St. J. Tyrwhitt, M.A., for- 
merly Student and Tutor of Christ Church, Oxford. With coloured Illustra- 
tions, Photographs, and a chapter on Perspective by A. Macdonald. 8vo. half 
morocco, i8s. 

A Treatise on Harmony. By Sir F. A. Gore Ouseley, Bart., M.A., 
Mus. Doc, Professor of Music in the University of Oxford. 4to. cloth, los. 

A Treatise on Counterpoint, Canon, and Fugue, based upon that of 
Cherubini. By the same Author. 4to. cloth, i6s. 

A System of Physical Education : Theoretical and Practical. By 
Archibald Maclaren, The Gymnasium, Oxford. Extra fcap, 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d. 



22 Clarendon Press Series. 



XI. ENGLISH CLASSICS. 

Designed to meet the wants of Students in English Literature : under the 
superintendence of the Rev. J. S. Brewer, M.A., of Queen's College, 
Oxford, and Professor of English Literature at King's College, London. 

There are two dangers to which the student of English Literature is 
exposed at the outset of his task ; — his reading is apt to be too narrow 
or too diffuse. 

Out of the vast number of authors set before him in books professing 
to deal with this subject he knows not which to select: he thinks he 
must read a little of all ; he soon abandons so hopeless an attempt ; he 
ends by contenting himself with second-hand information ; and profess- 
ing to study English Literature, he fails to master a single English author. 
On the other hand, by confining his attention to one or two writers, or 
to one special period of English Literature, the student narrows his view 
of it ; he fails to grasp the subject as a whole ; and in so doing misses 
one of the chief objects of his study. 

How may these errors be avoided? How may minute reading be 
combined with comprehensiveness of view ? 

In the hope of furnishing an answer to these questions the Delegates 
of the Press, acting upon the advice and experience of Professor Brewer, 
have determined to issue a series of small volumes, which shall embrace, 
in a convenient form and at a low price, the general extent of English 
Literature, as represented in its masterpieces at successive epochs. It is 
thought that the student, by confining himself, in the first instance, to 
those authors who are most worthy of his, attention, will be saved from 
the dangers of hasty and indiscriminate reading. By adopting the course 
thus marked out for him he will become familiar with the productions of 
the greatest minds in English Literature ; and should he never be able to 
pursue the subject beyond the limits here prescribed, he will have laid 
the foundation of accurate habits of thought and judgment, which cannot 
fail of being serviceable to him hereafter. 

The authors and works selected are such as will best serve to illus- 
trate English Literature in its historical aspect. As " the eye of history," 
without which history cannot be understood, the literature of a nation 
is the clearest and most intelligible record of its Ufe. Its thoughts and 
its emotions, its graver and its less serious modes, its progress, or its 
degeneracy, are told by its best authors in their best words. This view 
of the subject will suggest the safest rules for the study of it. 

With one exception all writers before the Reformation are excluded 
from the Series. However great may be the value of literature before 
that epoch, it is not completely national. For it had no common organ 
of language ; it addressed itself to special classes ; it dealt mainly with 



Clarendon Press Series. 23 

special subjects. Again ; of writers who flourished after the Reforma- 
tion, who were popular in their day, and reflected the manners and 
sentiments of their age, the larger part by far must be excluded from our 
list. Common sense tells us that if young persons, who have but a 
limited time at their disposal, read Marlowe or Greene, Burton, Hakewill 
or Du Bartas, Shakespeare, Bacon, and Milton will be comparatively 
neglected. 

Keeping, then, to the best authors in each epoch — and here popular 
estimation is a safe guide — the student will find the following list of 
writers amply sufficient for his purpose : Chaucer, Spenser, Hooker, 
Shakespeare, Bacon, Milton, Dryden, Bunyan, Pope, Johnson, Burke, 
and Cowper, In other words, Chaucer is the exponent of the Middle 
Ages in England ; Spenser of the Reformation and the Tudors ; Hooker 
of the latter years of Elizabeth ; Shakespeare and Bacon of the transition 
from Tudor to Stuart; Milton of Charles I and the Commonwealth; 
Dryden and Bunyan of the Restoration ; Pope of Anne and the House 
of Hanover ; Johnson, Burke, and Cowper of the reign of George III to 
the close of the last century. 

The list could be easily enlarged ; the names of Jeremy Taylor, 
Clarendon, Hobbes, Locke, Swift, Addison, Goldsmith, and others are 
omitted. But in so wide a field, the difficulty is to keep the series from 
becoming unwieldy, without diminishing its comprehensiveness. Here- 
after, should the plan prove to be useful, some of the masterpieces of the 
authors just mentioned may be added to the list. 

The task of selection is not yet finished. For purposes of education, 
it would neither be possible, nor, if possible, desirable, to place in the 
hands of students the whole of the works of the authors we have chosen. 
We must set before them only the masterpieces of Literature, and their 
studies must be directed, not only to the greatest minds, but to their 
choicest productions. These are to be read again and again, separately 
and in combination. Their purport, form, language, bearing on the 
times, must be minutely studied, till the student begins to recognise the 
full value of each work both in itself and in its relations to those that go 
before and those that follow it. 

It is especially hoped that this Series may prove useful to Ladies' 
Schools and Middle Class Schools; in which English Literature must 
always be a leading subject of instruction. 

A General Introduction to the Series. By Professor Brewer, M.A. 

1. Chaucer. The Prologue to the Canterbury Tales; The Knightes 

Tale; The Nonne Prestes Tale. Edited by R. Morris, Editor of "Specimens 
of Early English," &c., &c. Second Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, as. 6c?. 

2. Spenser's Faery Queene. Books I and II. Designed chiefly for 

the use of Schools. With Introduction, Notes, and Glossary. By G. W. Kitchin, 
M.A., formerly Censor of Christ Church. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d. each. 

3. Hooker. Ecclesiastical Polity, Book I. Edited by R. W. Church, 

M.A., Rector of Whatley; formerly Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford. Extra 
fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 



24 Clarendon Press Series. 

4. Shakespeare. Select Plays. Edited by W. G. Clark, M.A., Fellow 
of Trinity College, Cambridge, and Public Orator ; and W. Aldis Wriglit, M.A., 
Librarian of Trinity College, Cambridge. 

I. The Merchant of Venice. Extra fcap. 8vo. stiff covers, is. 
II. Richard the Second. Extra fcap. 8vo. stiff covers, is. 6d. 
III. Macbeth. Extra fcap. 8vo. stiff covers, is. 6c?. 

g. Bacon. Advancement of Learning. Edited by W. Aldis Wright, M. A. 
Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d. 

6. Milton. Poems. Edited by R. C. Browne, M.A., and Associate of 

King's College, London. In the Press. 

7 . Dryden. Stanzas on the Death of Oliver Cromwell ; Astraea Redux ; 

Annus Mirabilis ; Absalom and Achitophel ; Religio Laici ; The Hind and 
Panther. Edited by W. D. Christie, M.A., Trinity College, Cambridge. In the 
Press. 

8. Bunyan. Grace Abounding ; The Pilgrim's Progress. Edited by 

E. Venables, M.A., Canon of Lincoln. 

9. Pope. With Introduction and Notes. By Mark Pattison, B.D., 

Rector of Lincoln College, Oxford. 

I. Essay on Man. Extra fcap. 8vo. stiff covers, i?. 6d. 
II. Epistles and Satires. 

10. Johnson. Rasselas; Lives of Pope and Dryden. Edited by C. H. 
O. Daniel, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Worcester College, Oxford. 

11. Burke. Thoughts on the Present Discontents; the two Speeches 
on America ; Reflections on the French Revolution. 

12. Cowper. The Task, and some of his minor Poems. Edited by 
J. C. Shairp, M.A., Principal of the United Colleges, St. Andrews. 



Published for the University by 
MACMILIiAW AND CO., LONDON. 



Tke Delegates of the Press invite suggestions and 
advice from all persons interested in education ; and 
will be thankful for hints ^ &c. addressed to either the 
Rev. G. W. KiTCHiN, St. Giles's Road East, Oxford, 
or the Secretary to the Delegates, Clarendon 
Press, Oxford. 



3477-1 




v* 



N c '^ ' ' ■ ' ■" ^ l\,\ Deacidified using the Bookkeeper proces 

'.sf55X '' "^^ \"^ Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 

^v^^^^'' -^ ^-^ Treatment Date: i^^^ 2(105 

,v^^ ^K* « . o DKnoariraf innTorhnnlnnipi 



Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: i^^^ 2(105 

PreservationTechnologie: 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATIC 

111 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 









r>\ 










'^ 



Oc> 



/ "V 


















cP" 







^,S^ 



\^- 









^0^ 






'. . - j/-^ ^^ -.^: - ^ ^^ ^ . 





















A o 



\ '^- v^ : 



■ 






j> -^^ 



■A^^ 






S %"# 






■\ 






^^%. 






^•>.. 



V 






.^ , .\^^ 












0' 



,>\ 



^ o-'^' 






.^^ . 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




003 851 333 3 ♦ 



iii^^i 



li 



li 



Ilii 



